Harold Lyman Ryan

United States District Court for the District of Idaho district Retired 1995 · served 1981–1995 Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 30 signed orders read

Judge Ryan no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Idaho, Department of Health & Welfare v. Reynolds (In re Reynolds)
· 1982-12-14
Bankruptcy appeal (state agency appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons I hereby find the decisions of the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho correct, and the same are hereby AFFIRMED.”

Homestead Log Co. v. Square D Co.
· 1983-02-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Koeppen’s Motion to Dismiss should be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.”

Peffers v. Bowman
· 1984-12-26

Ryan addressed competing summary-judgment and injunction requests concerning Medicaid treatment of reimbursed medical expenses, but the published text does not include the separate decretal order.

Blume v. Leake
· 1985-06-04
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and hereby is, GRANTED pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”

Motion for filing injunction (defendants) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff is hereby ENJOINED FROM FILING future suits based upon the sale of this land. This will include, but is not limited to, suits against the Internal Revenue Service, agents of the Internal Revenue Service, and the purchasers of the property.”

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Fairchild
· 1986-01-16
Motion for reconsideration (Aetna) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Aetna’s Motion for Reconsideration should be, and is hereby, GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that that portion of the court’s October 23, 1985, order granting American’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and is hereby, RESCINDED.”

Seyler v. United States
· 1986-09-15
Summary judgment (defendant United States) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment be, and the same is hereby, GRANTED.”

Old Stone Capital Corp. v. John Hoene Implement Corp.
· 1986-11-18
Motion for partial summary judgment (Old Stone) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Old Stone’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment should be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Summary judgment (Davis) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Davis’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and is hereby, GRANTED.”

Hydraulic & Air Equipment Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp.
· 1987-01-30
Motion to dismiss or summary judgment (defendants) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment should be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

United States v. Davison
· 1987-03-16
Motion to amend judgment (government) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Amend Judgment and Commitment, and Previous Sentence Imposed, and motion for a no-benefit hearing should be, and are hereby, DENIED.”

Motion for no benefit hearing (government) Denied
Madsen v. United States
· 1987-04-13
Sua sponte dismissal (court) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint for damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq., should be, and is hereby, DISMISSED.”

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Trumble
· 1987-05-01
Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff insurer) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment should be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

State of Idaho Ex Rel. Soward v. USIRS
· 1987-05-04
Declaratory judgment claim (state liquidator) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, DECLARED AND ADJUDGED that the claims of the United States in the underlying liquidation proceeding receive their priority status, in that liquidation proceeding, pursuant to Idaho Code § 41-3342. By virtue of the application of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, as noted above, 31 U.S.C. § 3713 does not supersede Idaho Code § 41-3342.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 2042.5 days (N = 20).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 1 days (N = 7).

The 20 located dockets are a sparse pre-electronic cohort and do not represent Ryan's full caseload.

A historical record

Judge Ryan 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.