Bailey Aldrich

U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts district Retired 1959 · served 1954–1959 Appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 24 signed orders read

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

How Judge Aldrich decides

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

What persuades

In a malicious-prosecution suit he refused to treat a since-reversed criminal conviction as conclusive proof of probable cause where the underlying charge was legally untenable, declining to extend a conclusive presumption to a prosecution founded on a mistake of law.

“I see no reason of public policy for extending the protection of this conclusive presumption of probable cause to a prosecution which is legally untenable because founded upon a mistake of law.”

He declined to invent a new category of tort liability for fishermen simply because seamen are traditionally favored in admiralty, holding that the ordinary principles of liability apply regardless of a plaintiff's occupation.

“I do not believe that to say ‘seamen are the favorites of admiralty’ should be to create a corresponding class of villains on whom to impose a new type of liability.”

Procedural preferences

In a contempt-of-Congress prosecution he resolved every ambiguity in the phrasing and scope of the subcommittee's questions in the defendant's favor, refusing to allow separate convictions on counts that sought the same fact.

“All doubts as to the coincidence of the questions should be resolved in the defendant’s favor.”

He required litigants to exhaust the appropriate administrative remedy before he would decide a fee dispute turning on an agency's action, deferring his ruling until the party first applied to the regulator.

“Until then I will not pass on that, or on the question of liability.”

Signed rulings

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

Yong Hong Keung ex rel. Yong Lim v. Dulles
· 1954-12-10
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on prayer 1 is granted.”

Fardy v. Roen Transportation Co.
· 1956-03-23
Admiralty libel (libellant) Denied

“The libel must be dismissed.”

Cyrus v. United States
· 1955-06-13
Motions to dismiss (government) Granted

“The complaint will be dismissed.”

Engleman v. Progressive Machinery Corp.
· 1957-10-17
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendants’ motions denied.”

Motions to strike (defendant) Denied
Motion to amend (plaintiff) Granted

“it does not, and it is allowed.”

United States v. Saxe
· 1958-01-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“It follows that the action must be dismissed against the defendant executors,”

Ju Shu Cheung ex rel. Ju Wah Tau v. Dulles
· 1954-12-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“The defendant’s motion to dismiss or for summary judgment as to prayer 1 will, be granted.”

George P. Converse & Co. v. Polaroid Corp.
· 1956-06-01
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ motion allowed, and complaint dismissed.”

Rubenstein v. Kleven
· 1958-05-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.”

Rider v. Sprague Steamship Co.
· 1957-03-27
Motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict (defendant) Denied

“The motion for judgment n. o. v. is denied.”

Motion for new trial (defendant) Granted

“The verdict and the judgment entered thereon are set aside and a new trial ordered.”

Forbes v. Jenney Manufacturing Co.
· 1954-11-15
Motion for new trial (defendant) Granted in part

“I believe that it is greatly excessive, and I shall allow the defendant’s motion for a new trial unless the plaintiff files a remittitur of all damages above $20,000.”

Motion for judgment (defendant) Denied

“The defendant’s motion for entry of judgment for the defendant is denied.”

Mullins v. Mulcahy
· 1956-12-21
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“I see no reason for declining jurisdiction.”

Motions to strike (plaintiff) Granted

“Treating defendants’ demand for jury trial as a request for an advisory jury under Rule 39(c), 28 U.S.C.A., it is denied.”

Hogg v. Burkhart Engineering Associates, Inc.
· 1959-02-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“The motion is denied.”

A historical record

Judge Aldrich 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.