Sidney Oslin Smith Jr.
Judge Smith no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Smith decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Smith balanced comparative injury, irreparable harm, and the public interest when deciding whether to enjoin enforcement of a challenged building code.
“On balancing of damage, convenience, and the public interest, the equities appear to be with the plaintiff.”
He treated meaningful state contacts and the state's regulatory interests as supporting personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state manufacturer.
“Keeping in mind Georgia’s legitimate interest in preventing Georgia consumers from being misled and in protecting Georgia manufacturers from unfair competition”
Procedural preferences
Smith required a showing of prejudice before striking allegations from a pleading.
“Motions to strike are not favored under the federal rules, and should not be granted unless allegations are prejudicial to the adverse party.”
He treated damages allegations concerning reputation and earnings as opening related background and financial matters to discovery.
“In seeking damages as to his reputation for honesty and loss of earnings, the plaintiff has made these matters subject to discovery”
Cautions
Smith read statutory exemptions according to their practical subject matter and declined to extend an agricultural exemption to a nonfarm laboratory-animal business.
“The clear intent of the agricultural exemption is to exempt agricultural or farm activities.”
In Title VII litigation, he examined whether the administrative charge gave the agency a genuine opportunity to conciliate the challenged practice before suit.
“Thus it appears that plaintiff filed charges against both the Corporation and the Union relating to their seniority system, and that the EEOC had an opportunity to attempt to resolve the controversy between plaintiff and the defendants by informal conference and conciliation, as is intended by Title VII.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the third party defendant’s motion for summary judgment against the third party plaintiff is granted”
“the defendant’s motion for summary judgment against plaintiff is denied.”
“Accordingly, defendants will be enjoined from enforcing those provisions of Section 5, Section 6, and Section 7 of the Gwinnett County Code set out in the complaint”
“upon motion, the answers were dismissed. The case then proceeded in default.”
“Let judgment issue in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants, jointly and severally, in the sum of $2,500.00 compensatory damages, $1,-000.00 punitive damages, and $1,500.00 attorneys fees, plus costs of suit.”
“Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment must be, and hereby is, granted.”
“Defendants’ motion to dismiss is therefore granted.”
“Accordingly, the request is denied without prejudice for it to be renewed in connection with any proceeding the prisoner desires to file in connection with his conviction.”
“defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict must be granted.”
“Defendant’s motion to dismiss must be denied.”
“Defendant’s motion to quash return of service is, therefore, denied.”
“Defendant’s motion for oral argument is denied.”
“Accordingly, the motion to dismiss on behalf of defendant Douglas is denied.”
“The motion for reconsideration is denied.”
“It follows that defendants' motion to dismiss must be, and hereby is, denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed decisions predate representative electronic case-level dockets. The profile therefore makes no claim about complete caseload mix, case duration, administrative dispositions, or motion timing.
A historical record
Judge Smith 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.