Andrew Augustine Caffrey

United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts district Retired 1986 · served 1961–1986 Appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 16 signed orders read

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

How Judge Caffrey decides

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

What persuades

Caffrey granted preliminary relief when the record showed likely success, immediate irreparable harm, and no countervailing injury to the defendant.

“Ben & Jerry’s will suffer irreparable harm in the immediate future if defendants’ violations of the two settlement agreements are not preliminarily enjoined. Haagen-Dazs, on the other hand, will suffer no harm if a preliminary injunction is granted.”

Caffrey treated supported agency fact-finding as controlling even when the medical evidence conflicted.

“the resolution of conflicting testimony is a matter for the Secretary and not for the United States District Court.”

Procedural preferences

Caffrey required an independent judicial basis before permitting the government to dismiss criminal charges.

“a District Court in passing on a motion by the Government to dismiss is not a mere rubber stamp and must exercise independent discretion”

Caffrey expressly valued consistency among judges confronting materially similar questions.

“in the interests of having judges of this court make the same ruling on substantially similar legal issues wherever it is possible to do so”

Cautions

Caffrey dismissed a habeas claim when the plaintiff had not pursued available state remedies.

“this court lacks jurisdiction, since it is nowhere alleged in the complaint, and plaintiff conceded at oral argument, that he never took a direct appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court from his conviction in Superior Court, nor has he taken advantage of any other remedy presently available to him in the courts of the Commonwealth.”

Caffrey treated complete diversity at the commencement of the state action as essential to removal jurisdiction.

“by reason of said incomplete diversity this case was improperly removed to this court.”

Signed rulings

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

Sawyer & Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The motion for summary judgment must be allowed because on this record it does not appear that two of the requirements of 49 U.S.C.A. 20(11) have been satisfied”

Lubben v. Selective Service System, Local Board No. 27
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“Local Board No. 27 is enjoined from ordering plaintiff to submit to induction unless and until it expressly, and as a matter of record, makes a de jure reopening of his case and decides same on the merits”

Town of Norwood v. United States
Summary judgment (plaintiff Town of Norwood) Denied

“denying the motion for summary judgment of the plaintiff Town of Norwood.”

Summary judgment (defendant Penn Central Company) Granted

“allowing motion for summary judgment on behalf of the defendants United States, Interstate Commerce Commission, and Penn Central Company”

Summary judgment (defendants United States and Interstate Commerce Commission) Granted
United States v. Malcouronne
Motion for bill of particulars (defendant) Denied

“The motion for bill of particulars is denied as to paragraphs 4 and 12”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“The motion to dismiss indictment is denied.”

Ben & Jerry's Homemade, Inc. v. Haagen-Dazs Co.
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“Ben & Jerry’s is entitled to a preliminary injunction in the form of prayer 1 to the Verified Complaint.”

United States v. Bettinger Corp.
Motions to dismiss (United States) Denied

“The motion to dismiss is denied.”

Foley v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Motions to dismiss (Commonwealth of Massachusetts) Granted

“the defendant’s motion to dismiss is allowed.”

Motion for appointment of counsel (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion for appointment of counsel is denied.”

Grayson ex rel. Grayson v. Malone
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Cross-motions for summary judgment filed herein were argued, briefed, and denied.”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied
Civil rights claim after bench trial (plaintiff) Denied

“A judgment will be entered for the defendants, and the complaint is dismissed.”

Rodgers v. Living Room Lounge, Inc.
Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Granted

“Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is allowed in the amount of the statutory minimum”

Pimental v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the defendant’s motion for summary judgment is allowed.”

Simari v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion of plaintiff for judgment in his favor is denied”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the motion of defendant for summary judgment is allowed.”

Doherty v. Sylvania Pension Plan for Hourly Employees
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is allowed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 2161.5 days (N = 20).

The twenty located dockets are a historical archive slice, not a complete caseload. All were terminated. Six were land-condemnation matters; the remainder included contract, product-liability, civil-rights, antitrust, ERISA, statutory, and other civil cases.

A historical record

Judge Caffrey 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.