Herbert Frazier Murray

How Judge Murray rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Murray 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
1971–1999
Appointed by
Richard Nixon (Republican)
Commissioned
1971-07-29
Education
Yale University, B.A. (1947); University of Maryland School of Law, LL.B. (1951)
Signed orders read
20

How Judge Murray decides

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

What persuades

In Daisley, Murray followed the limitations period stated in the federal statute without importing an additional state-filing deadline.

“As Congress wrote this section without mention of or reference to state statutes of limitations, this Court will not imply this additional requirement.”

In Mangieri, Murray distinguished formally separate tax liabilities from the practical connection between them when assessing the government’s position.

“The problem with this argument is that while the two liabilities may be ‘separate’, they are not unrelated, and the 100% penalty is imposed only if the corporate tax liability is not paid.”

In St. Agnes, Murray treated delegated accreditation authority as state action where it directly affected physician licensing.

“The fact that the state has chosen to delegate this aspect of its licensing responsibility to a private organization does not mean that state action is no longer involved.”

Procedural preferences

In Kahn, Murray treated a conspicuous written jury demand on the complaint as sufficient under the rule.

“The court finds that plaintiff’s chosen method of demanding a jury trial, placing the phrase ‘Jury Trial Demanded’ under the docket number, constitutes indorsing the pleading.”

In Tenneco, Murray declined interlocutory review where a discretionary pleading ruling lacked a substantial ground for disagreement and an appeal would prolong old litigation.

“the taking of an interlocutory appeal at this time would serve to delay further trial in a matter which has been on this court’s docket for approximately ten years.”

In Grandison, Murray enforced the objection deadline for a magistrate recommendation while also reviewing the merits independently.

“Because the Court received no objections to Magistrate Klein’s Report and Recommendation within the prescribed time period, the Court is under no obligation to conduct de novo review of any part of it.”

Signed rulings

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

Kahn v. Head
· 1987-01-07
Motion to strike jury demand (defendant) Denied

“that defendant’s Motion to Strike Case from Jury Trial Docket be, and hereby is, Denied;”

Motion for jury trial (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“that plaintiff’s Motion for Jury Trial Under Rule 39(b) be, and hereby is, marked as Moot;”

Claire Manufacturing Co. v. International Ladies Garment Workers' Union
· 1987-07-15
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“The court will enter a separate order, denying the motion of Claire Manufacturing Company for a preliminary injunction and dismissing case Civil No. HM87-1387 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

United States v. Towns
· 1987-06-16
Magistrate appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“that Mr. Towns’ appeal of his conviction be, and hereby is, Dismissed;”

Kahn v. Head
· 1988-09-06
Motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict (plaintiff) Denied

“That plaintiff’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, Paper No. 43, BE, and hereby IS, DENIED;”

Attorneys fees (defendant) Granted

“That defendant’s motion for costs, Paper No. 42, BE, and hereby IS, GRANTED;”

Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Granted in part

“That the Court’s Memorandum and Order of September 6, 1988, be, and the same hereby is, Modified to state that plaintiffs motion was timely filed.”

United States v. Johnson
· 1987-05-13
Motion for pretrial ruling (defendant) Denied

“For all of the reasons outlined above, the court concludes that it will not read a specific intent requirement in § 2113(a)”

Tenneco Resins, Inc. v. Reeves Bros.
· 1984-04-19
Interlocutory appeal certification (plaintiff) Denied

“that plaintiff Tenneco’s motion for certification of a portion of this court’s February 22, 1984 order be, and the same hereby is, Denied;”

Daisley v. General Electric Co.
· 1987-11-25
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, Paper No. 3, be, and the same hereby is, Denied with respect to alleged acts of discrimination occurring on or after July 20, 1982, and Granted with respect to alleged acts of discrimination occurring pri- or to July 20, 1982;”

United States v. Morris
· 1988-04-11
Magistrate appeal (defendant-appellant) Granted

“that the Magistrate’s verdict of guilty as to Morris’ possession of PCP be, and the same hereby is, Vaóated;”

Gibbs v. Harris
· 1980-10-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Given these facts, this court will grant defendant’s motion to dismiss Mr. Gibbs’ complaint for failure to comply with the time requirements of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment or default judgment shall be Denied.”

United States v. Grandison
· 1988-05-27

On remand, Murray found no prima facie showing that prosecutors had used peremptory challenges with purposeful racial discrimination.

Mangieri v. United States
· 1986-10-21
Motion to alter or amend judgment (United States) Denied

“that defendant’s motion to alter or amend judgment be, and the same hereby is, Denied;”

Attorneys fees (plaintiff) Granted

“that plaintiff’s motion for costs and attorneys fees, filed pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7430, be, and the same hereby is, Granted in the amount of nine thousand and twenty-two dollars ($9,022.00);”

Deckinger v. Castro-Reyes
· 1988-02-22
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Court will enter summary judgment in his favor.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 2633 days (N = 10).

A fixed sample of ten of the oldest returned assigned cases included three contract matters, two employment civil-rights cases, two asbestos cases, and one each involving tax, prisoner civil rights, and product liability. Every sampled case was terminated, and none retained a motion-entry timeline.

A historical record

Judge Murray 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.