Harold Loyd Murphy
Judge Murphy no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Murphy decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Murphy treated the difference between copying nature and adding distinctive expression as central to copyrightability.
“the key here is that Mannington attempted to reproduce something that occurs naturally and sought copyright protection for the result.”
He treated the efficient use of party resources as the most important consideration in permissive withdrawal of a bankruptcy reference.
“Based on the Eleventh Circuit’s ease law, this factor is the most important for the Court in deciding whether to exercise its discretion to withdraw the reference.”
Procedural preferences
In deferential ERISA review, Murphy ordinarily confined judicial review to the administrative record.
“Consequently, discovery outside the administrative record ordinarily is inappropriate when the abuse of discretion standard of review applies.”
He declined to resolve a merits question when causation independently disposed of the claim.
“The Court, however, declines to decide that issue absent additional briefing. In any case, the Court finds that determining whether a private cause of action exists is unnecessary because Plaintiff fails to sufficiently allege causation, and Plaintiff's claim consequently fails.”
Cautions
Murphy distinguished remand from fee entitlement and denied fees where removal had an objectively reasonable basis.
“Here, the Court cannot conclude that Defendant Auto-Owners lacked an objectively reasonable basis for removal. Indeed, the question whether realignment was proper was a reasonably close one.”
He warned that summary-judgment fact recitations are contextual rather than actual factual findings.
“This statement does not represent actual findings of fact.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court DENIES Defendant Pan-American’s Motion for Reconsideration [17].”
“Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the January 11, 1993 Order of the Bankruptcy Court.”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Arbitration [3].”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court GRANTS the Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment [14], ORDERS that the Defendant Vehicle be forfeited to the Government, and DIRECTS the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.”
“The Court therefore finds that Plaintiff provided sufficient service of process to Defendant Sun and denies Defendant Sun's Motion to Dismiss based on service of process.”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion to Amend [32]”
“the Court denies Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Response as moot.”
“GRANTS Defendant Sun’s Motion to Dismiss [31].”
“DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Attorney Fees [20].”
“DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and for Order to Show Cause for a Preliminary Injunction [5]”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court GRANTS Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss [8]”
“To the extent Petitioner’s petition included a request for discovery, the request is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time [41].”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court GRANTS Defendants Motion to Dismiss [19].”
“ACCORDINGLY, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [114], and DISMISSES this case.”
“the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Adopt Co-Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment [247]”
“GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Adopt Co-Defendant’s Objections [295].”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies Defendant’s Adopted Motion to Dismiss Indictment.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
One complete intellectual-property docket was analyzed for motion timing. It is not a representative caseload sample, and the profile makes no claim about Murphy's career-wide case mix.
A historical record
Judge Murphy no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.