Norman Park Ramsey

How Judge Ramsey rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Ramsey 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
1980–1993
Appointed by
Jimmy Carter (Democratic)
Commissioned
1980-09-30
Education
University of Maryland School of Law, LL.B. (1947)
Signed orders read
19

How Judge Ramsey decides

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

What persuades

In Ficker, Ramsey required a compelling justification for restricting paid initiative-petition advocacy.

“The Court finds that the State has not demonstrated a compelling interest to be served by barring expenditures for the solicitation of ballot signatures and accordingly holds that § 23-5(4)’s limitation on expenditure for petition solicitors in initiative measures is an undue infringement on the rights of political expression and to that extent is void.”

In Fenwick-Schafer, he treated exclusive use of white models as evidence sufficient to prevent summary disposition of a fair-housing advertising claim.

“Plaintiffs in this case have alleged and have preliminarily demonstrated defendants’ exclusive use of white models.”

In Kennedy, Ramsey found the government’s position indefensible because the agency failed to apply its own regulation.

“Given the Secretary’s failure to apply the dictates of her own regulations, it becomes apparent that her litigation position was legally and factually indefensible.”

Procedural preferences

In Dashiell, Ramsey stayed discovery where the requested material would matter only if the case survived summary judgment.

“If this Court disposes of this litigation under Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P., as defendants request, there would be no purpose for plaintiffs to discover the contested material.”

In Grant, he applied the complaint-stage rule by viewing allegations favorably and resolving doubts for the plaintiff.

“In ruling upon the pending motions to dismiss, this Court must view the complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiff and resolve every doubt in plaintiff’s behalf.”

In G & M Oil, Ramsey required more than a scintilla of supporting evidence to avoid summary judgment.

“That is, the ‘mere existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the plaintiffs position will be insufficient’ to defeat a motion for summary judgment.”

Signed rulings

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

Dashiell v. Montgomery County
· 1989-11-16
Motion for protective order (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion for a protective order to stay all discovery pending a determination of defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.”

Shor v. Floyd (In re Annapolis Mall Motel Ltd. Partnership)
· 1991-12-03
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“ORDERED that the instant adversary proceeding be and the same is hereby REMANDED to the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County.”

Engle v. United States
· 1989-06-20
Motion to dismiss or for summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“1. That defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment be and the same hereby is GRANTED; 2. That plaintiff’s complaint be and the same hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
· 1987-07-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“1. That defendant’s motion to dismiss is DENIED:”

Schwartz Bros., Inc. v. Striped Horse Records
· 1990-08-30
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“1. That Plaintiffs motion to remand the action to state court is GRANTED;”

Costs (plaintiff) Denied

“3. That Plaintiff’s motion to impose costs on the defendant is DENIED.”

Hospital Employees, Local 1273 v. Deaton Hospital and Medical Center of Christ Lutheran Church
· 1986-11-13
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“1. That defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED;”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“2. That plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED;”

McGreevy v. ITT Financial Services
· 1991-06-19
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant) Denied

“1. That the findings of Bankruptcy Court that firearms are not property on which a lien may be avoided pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A) is AFFIRMED;”

Kennedy v. Heckler
· 1984-10-22
Attorneys fees (plaintiff's counsel) Granted

“Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, a separate Order shall be entered directing that the amount of $1,226.00 be paid to Attorney Leonard A. Sandler, by the United States, as his full and only fee for *126representing plaintiff in the District Court in this civil action.”

Polansky ex rel. State Accident Fund v. Ryobi America Corp.
· 1991-03-28
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiffs) Granted

“1. That plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration is GRANTED.”

Doelcher Products, Inc. v. Hydrofoil International, Inc.
· 1989-09-27
Motion to sever and transfer (defendants) Granted

“1. That defendants’ motion to sever McClean Brothers, Inc. and transfer the action between plaintiff and defendant Hydrofoil to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is GRANTED;”

Trustees of National Automatic Sprinkler Industry Pension Fund v. Best Automatic Fire Protection, Inc.
· 1983-10-18
Motions to transfer (defendant) Denied

“1. That defendant Best Automatic Fire Protection, Inc.,’s motion for transfer of action is DENIED;”

Travelers Insurance Co. v. Goldberg
· 1992-01-10
Motion to file supplementary opposition (plaintiff) Granted

“1. That plaintiff’s motion to file supplementary opposition BE, and hereby IS, GRANTED;”

Motion for referral to bankruptcy court (defendants) Denied

“2. That defendants’ motion for referral to the Bankruptcy Court BE, and hereby IS DENIED;”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 1045.5 days (N = 10).

A fixed-seed sample of ten terminated historical cases included three product-liability matters, two motor-vehicle injury matters, two environmental matters, and one each involving other personal liability, civil rights, and prisoner civil rights. None retained a motion-entry timeline.

A historical record

Judge Ramsey 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.