Carl B. Sussman
Judge Sussman no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Sussman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the recorded retaliatory-discharge dispute, Sussman declined to dismiss the claim merely because the employee had not yet filed a workers' compensation claim when the alleged retaliatory firing occurred; the district judge affirmed.
“Before the Court is the motion of Defendant Fireman’s Fund American Insurance Company to Reconsider and Review the March 14, 1983 ruling of Magistrate Carl Sussman denying defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.”
Procedural preferences
In a patent-discovery dispute, he required production of test-related documents, and the district judge affirmed the production order.
“30. On September 4, 1979, Magistrate Sussman ordered those documents produced.”
In one recorded interrogatory dispute, he required a modified answer while declining to impose sanctions, separating compliance relief from punishment.
“55. On November 18, 1982, Magistrate Sussman ordered that Lippo modify his supplemental interrogatory No. 3, and that the Mobil file its answer to same within 30 days. He further ordered that no sanctions be granted.”
Cautions
A reviewing court vacated his order requiring corporate agents to travel to Chicago for depositions, concluding that a compulsory counterclaim did not overcome the usual protection for a corporate defendant's deposition location.
“Therefore, the November 4,1982, order of Magistrate Sussman, granting Zuckert’s motion to compel defendants’ agents to travel to Chicago for depositions is vacated and the depositions in question are to be taken at the location of defendants-counter-plaintiffs’ business.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Before the Court is the motion of Defendant Fireman’s Fund American Insurance Company to Reconsider and Review the March 14, 1983 ruling of Magistrate Carl Sussman denying defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.”
“Magistrate Sussman’s report to the Court on June 7, 1982, recommended that we vacate the order for civil penalties of $5,000 and also that we not find Mazur in civil contempt.”
“Magistrate Sussman’s denial of their motion to dismiss, therefore, cannot properly be considered error.”
“Specifically, they contend that the Magistrate erred when denying their Requests for Production dealing with the personnel folders of those postal employees the government intended to call as witnesses, and for those Postal Service and Wheaton Post Office regulations, bulletins and internal guidelines pertaining or applicable to the parcel post handling functions performed by the defendants.”
“The defendants-appellants’ contention that Magistrate Sussman erred in denying their pretrial request to have the government establish its ‘chain of custody’ with respect to the videotapes presented at trial has, in this court’s opinion, been effectively mooted by defendant Garton’s admission, at trial, that said videotapes fairly and accurately depicted his actions on the evenings of November 4 and 5, 1977.”
“On November 4,1982, Magistrate Carl B. Sussman entered an order granting plaintiff-counterdefendant Sol Zuckert’s (‘Zuckert’) motion to compel defendants-counterplaintiffs’ agents, Herbert Berkley, Allen Berkley and Kemal Sidak, to travel to Chicago for depositions.”
“Magistrate Sussman heard the parties and entered orders granting either in whole or in part the motions to compel made by Empire and some made by American.”
“In one instance he granted a motion by American for sanctions against Empire; this court affirmed Magistrate Sussman’s order.”
“The Magistrate further found that Marathon gave proper notice to terminate the lease pursuant to the PMPA; based on that finding and of LoBosco’s breach of the lease due to misbranding, the Magistrate concluded that LoBosco should be evicted.”
“55. On November 18, 1982, Magistrate Sussman ordered that Lippo modify his supplemental interrogatory No. 3, and that the Mobil file its answer to same within 30 days. He further ordered that no sanctions be granted.”
“69. On February 24, 1983, after oral argument, Lippo’s motion to compel was granted and the request for sanctions was reserved until the final issues were determined.”
“71. On March 9, 1983, Magistrate Suss-man granted defendant’s motion to compel, and plaintiff’s request for the production of price surveys.”
“30. On September 4, 1979, Magistrate Sussman ordered those documents produced.”
“Upon consideration of the application which was made under oath, Magistrate Sussman issued the warrant.”
“The defendants have filed motions to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant issued by Magistrate Sussman on June 11, 1981, and executed on the same date.”
“The Magistrate concluded that the government had demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, that no condition *1448 or combination of conditions of pretrial release would reasonably assure the safety of the community and persons within the community.”
Contextual order: during a school-discipline challenge, Sussman arranged a supervised self-study course for the expelled student. The publication states: 'Upon an order issued by Magistrate Sussman, David is engaged in a self study course offered through the University of Nebraska.' It does not identify the underlying motion or request.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No assigned electronic docket was located for Sussman's 1971-1984 service, so no docket-based caseload mix, case-duration, motion-outcome, or timing claim is available.
A historical record
Judge Sussman 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.