David Frank Hamilton
Judge Hamilton no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Hamilton decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In FDCPA consumer-protection cases he read the statute purposively and consequentially, declining to extend the Fifth Circuit's Goswami rule because a theory treating any time-limited discount offer as a false 'one time only' representation would discourage the very settlements the Act is meant to facilitate.
“Whether intentionally or not, plaintiffs’ theories in these cases would turn the FDCPA upside down and would make it more difficult for debtors to resolve their debts at a discount.”
In an influential early Americans with Disabilities Act decision he held that the duty of reasonable accommodation does not override a bona fide collective-bargaining seniority system at other employees' expense — a limit later echoed by the Supreme Court in US Airways v. Barnett.
“The court concludes that the ADA does not require as a ‘reasonable accommodation’ actions that would violate a bona fide seniority system at the expense of other employees’ rights under a collective bargaining agreement.”
Procedural preferences
On Rule 12 motions he decided threshold legal questions on the pleadings where the operative documents were attached to the complaint, resolving as a matter of law whether alleged representations could plausibly mislead rather than deferring every such question to a jury.
“In this case, the settlement letters were not false, and they are not reasonably susceptible to a deceptive or misleading interpretation.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the court grants defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Docket No. 40) and its supplemental motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Docket No. 42)”
“the court denies the defendant’s motion for sanctions filed in Evory v. RJM Acquisitions Funding, LLC, No. 1:05-cv-0140”
“Captain’s motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.”
“ARS’s motion for summary judgment is denied.”
“St. Paul’s motion for summary judgment is granted”
“Corn Island’s motion for summary judgment is denied”
“CPI’s motion for summary judgment on infringement (Remand Docket No. 72) is granted to the extent that any proven actual use of the St.Jude devices for cardioversion therapy infringes claim 4 as a matter of law. CPI’s motion is denied in other respects”
“St. Jude’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of infringement (Remand Docket No. 85) is also denied.”
“the court therefore grants St. Jude’s motion for summary judgment on the ground of anticipation (Docket No. 80)”
“defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted as to all of Zusy’s claims.”
“IMG has also moved to strike Zusy’s deposition errata sheet and affidavit. This motion is denied.”
“the defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaints are granted”
“defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 37) is GRANTED as to Fidler’s claims against Officer Hendricks, his negligent training constitutional claim against City of Indianapolis (Count V) ... The motion is DENIED as to Fidler’s excessive force and failure to restrain claims against Officers Santa and Hofmeister”
“Defendants’ motion to strike is denied.”
“defendants’ motion for reconsideration (Docket No. 52) is granted”
“defendants’ recent motion to convert their motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 67, is denied as moot”
“Howmedica’s motion to dismiss Counts I and IV through IX of Hofts’ Amended Complaint has been denied”
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss/Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED”
“G & H’s motion for summary judgment is denied”
“genuine issues of material fact require denial of Cram’s motion for summary judgment as to both the age and disability discrimination claims”
A historical record
Judge Hamilton 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.