Green Wix Unthank

How Judge Unthank rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Position
district
Status
Deceased
Served
1980–2013
Appointed by
Jimmy Carter (Democratic)
Commissioned
1980-06-18
Education
University of Miami School of Law, J.D. (1950)
Signed orders read
15

How Judge Unthank decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In Millen, Unthank remanded where the vocational hypothetical omitted pace restrictions that the administrative law judge had accepted.

“the court therefore cannot find that the VE’s testimony provides substantial evidence to carry the Commissioner’s burden at Step Five.”

Procedural preferences

In Howes, Unthank distinguished a regulator's general statutory enforcement duty from a specific duty owed to an individual miner.

“the obligation, if any is a statutory obligation to see that the regulated mines comply with the requirements of the law.”

Signed rulings

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

Howes v. Childers
· 1981-04-02
Motions to dismiss (state defendants for failure to prosecute) Denied

“However, the Court will not at this time sustain the above indicated motions.”

Motions to dismiss (state defendants for failure to comply with court rules) Denied
Summary judgment (defendant Homer Childers) Granted

“That the defendants motions for summary judgment are SUSTAINED.”

Summary judgment (defendant Willard Stanley) Granted
Summary judgment (defendant Ernest Wells) Granted
Elbo Coals, Inc. v. United States
· 1984-05-08
Summary judgment (defendant United States) Granted

“the defendant is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.”

McElhinney v. Medical Protective Co.
· 1982-09-21
Motion for directed verdict (remaining hospital and physician defendants) Granted

“Accordingly, the motion for a directed verdict as to the remaining defendants must be granted.”

Millen v. Astrue
· 2011-01-24
Social security appeal (claimant) Granted

“Since the case is being remanded on other grounds, the new evidence can be considered along with the plaintiffs other arguments on remand.”

Hollins v. Astrue
· 2011-01-24
Social security appeal (claimant) Granted

“the administrative decision must be reversed and the action remanded to the Commissioner for further consideration.”

Jones v. Astrue
· 2011-04-21
Social security appeal (claimant) Granted

“The undersigned concludes that the administrative decision must be reversed and the action remanded to the Commissioner for further consideration.”

Gray v. Astrue
· 2011-02-01
Social security appeal (claimant) Granted

“a remand will be required for further consideration of these factors.”

Abrams v. Astrue
· 2009-06-30
Summary judgment (defendant Commissioner of Social Security) Granted

“(1) the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED;”

Summary judgment (plaintiff claimant) Denied

“(2) the Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is DENIED;”

Castle v. Chater
· 1996-04-30
Motions to dismiss (defendant Secretary of Health and Human Services) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED;”

Banks v. Apfel
· 2001-01-29
Summary judgment (defendant Commissioner of Social Security) Granted in part

“(1) the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part;”

Summary judgment (plaintiff claimant) Granted in part

“(2) the Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part;”

Kentucky Natural Resources Cabinet v. Daniels (In re Daniels)
· 1991-06-07
Bankruptcy appeal (Commonwealth of Kentucky and its agencies) Granted

“Thus, the decision of the Bankruptcy Court is reversed.”

Trent v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
· 1992-03-23
Summary judgment (plaintiff claimant) Granted

“(1) the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED to the extent that it seeks a determination that the Secretary’s decision is not fully supported by substantial evidence;”

Summary judgment (defendant Secretary of Health and Human Services) Denied

“(2) the defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED;”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 1867 days (N = 5).

The five sampled terminated matters included three benefits-related cases and one matter each categorized as another statutory action and civil rights.

A historical record

Judge Unthank 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.