Frank Albert Kaufman

How Judge Kaufman rules, drawn from 21 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
Position
district
Status
Deceased
Served
1966–1997
Appointed by
Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic)
Commissioned
1966-09-22
Education
Dartmouth College, A.B. (1937); Harvard Law School, LL.B. (1940)
Signed orders read
21

How Judge Kaufman decides

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

What persuades

In Liles, Kaufman required the agency to identify other suitable work once the claimant showed she could not return to her prior job.

“If a claimant such as plaintiff herein establishes an inability to return to the claimant’s former job, then the Secretary has the burden to come forward with proof to show that other substantial gainful employment, which plaintiff is capable of performing, exists in the national economy.”

In Lincoln National, Kaufman left accidental-death coverage for trial where the record supported competing factual conclusions.

“reasonable minds could differ as to whether the death of Mr. Hawkins was ‘accidental.’”

In Gonzales, Kaufman treated driving instructors as exempt professionals based on the substance of their teaching work.

“Each and all of the instructors are, in the view of this Court, teachers who are ‘professionals’ within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(1).”

Procedural preferences

In Crowe, Kaufman allowed the examined party to use the examining physician's testimony rather than treating the witness as inaccessible work product.

“In return for suffering an invasion of his person, the examined party is entitled to make use of such information as results from the examination.”

In Roby, Kaufman conditioned transfer on the movant covering the added expense imposed on the opposing parties.

“provided that defendant agrees to pay the additional expenses which plaintiffs may incur as a result of the transfer.”

In Gordon, Kaufman linked discovery sanctions to deterrence and reduced the requested amount to reasonable fees and costs.

“Rule 37, much like Rule 11, is designed to deter future misconduct during discovery.”

Signed rulings

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

Union Barge Line Corp. v. United Rental Equipment Co.
· 1974-06-24
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted for its claim.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on defendant’s counterclaim is also granted.”

Smith v. Randall
· 1974-12-12
Motions to dismiss (United States) Granted

“Therefore, the Government’s motion to dismiss this case as to those defendants is hereby granted.”

Summary judgment (United States) Granted

“Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary judgment as to the Postal Service is hereby granted.”

Liles v. Weinberger
· 1974-12-31
Social security review (claimant) Granted

“remanded to the Secretary for further administrative proceedings in accordance with this opinion.”

Jarrells v. United States
· 1975-05-19
Motion to vacate sentence (petitioner) Denied

“For the reasons stated hereinabove, Jarrells’ quest for relief herein is hereby denied, without prejudice to his right to file subsequently for relief in an appropriate forum.”

Roby v. General Tire & Rubber Co.
· 1980-09-26
Motions to dismiss (General Tire & Rubber Co.) Denied

“Accordingly, defendant’s venue motion must and does fail.”

Motions to transfer (General Tire & Rubber Co.) Granted

“defendant’s motion to transfer the within case to the Middle District of Pennsylvania will be granted, provided that defendant agrees to pay the additional expenses which plaintiffs may incur as a result of the transfer.”

Omega Accounts Servicing Corp. v. Koller
· 1980-11-28
Motions to dismiss (United States) Granted

“For the reasons set forth hereinabove, United States’ motion to dismiss will granted.”

Curtis v. Radiation Dynamics, Inc.
· 1981-06-02
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“defendant’s motion to dismiss will be denied.”

Crowe v. Nivison
· 1993-01-28
Motion for protective order (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion for a Protective Order is hereby DENIED.”

Sparwasser v. Federal Kemper Insurance
· 1994-07-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be granted.”

Hallock v. Key Federal Savings Bank (In re Silver Oak Homes, Ltd.)
· 1994-07-05
Motion to dismiss appeal (appellees) Granted

“For the reasons set forth supra, appellees’ motion to dismiss will be granted.”

Harris v. Thrift Stores of Washington
· 1995-08-11
Motion to strike jury demand (defendants) Granted

“For the reasons set forth in this Court’s August 11, 1995 Memorandum and Order, defendants’ said motion to strike is hereby granted.”

Nugent v. Curry
· 1995-12-13
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Accordingly, plaintiff Nugent is hereby awarded partial summary judgment, as to liability, against defendants Morehead and defendant Southwestern Bell.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 4206 days (N = 5).

The five sampled terminated matters included land-condemnation, prisoner civil-rights, environmental, and other civil disputes; their entry streams were empty.

A historical record

Judge Kaufman 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.