Gene Carter
How Judge Carter rules, drawn from 21 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Carter no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Carter
Gene Carter was a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maine. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Carter received a commission on June 23, 1983. Judge Carter assumed senior status on January 2, 2003 and served until death on November 17, 2021.
How Judge Carter decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Coffin v. Bowater, Carter weighed against reconsideration the plaintiffs' failure to raise an effective-date argument during earlier briefing in a heavily litigated case.
“It is, however, difficult for the Court to believe with confidence, in a case as hard-fought and well-litigated as this case has been, that Plaintiffs' attorneys simply failed to ‘focus’ on this integral issue relating to the effective date of the 2003 Plan... This factor weighs against reconsideration.”
In Speed v. Giddings & Lewis, Carter declined to exclude the plaintiff's liability expert. Because the expert was not offered as an accident reconstructionist, a dispute over his understanding of the accident affected the weight of his testimony rather than its admissibility.
“Because it does not appear that Mr. Barnett is proffered as an accident reconstruction expert, Defendant's challenge to Mr. Barnett's factual understanding of how the accident occurred goes to the weight, and not the admissibility, of his testimony.”
In Wild Willy's Holding v. Palladino, Carter denied a preliminary injunction despite similar sounding business names. He found the lounge and family restaurant served different markets, with no demonstrated overlap in their advertising or trade channels.
“the general focus of a lounge or bar operation is significantly different than that of a family-style restaurant... the record does not disclose that there is a relationship between the parties advertising or channels of trade.”
Procedural preferences
He was reluctant to grant an unopposed Rule 54(b) request for an early appealable judgment on a single claim without a developed record showing why the usual practice of one appeal at the end of the case should not apply: a bare assertion that a party wants finality was not enough.
“A 'talismanic' statement in the judgment that 'there is no just reason for delay in the entry of final judgment' is not sufficient to signal[] such a decision... That sparse factual predicate does not permit the Court to articulate a basis for a deliberative and properly considered discretionary decision.”
In McGarey v. York County, Carter set aside Lanoie’s default after finding his account credible and the default not willful; his lack of diligence weighed only slightly against relief.
“This is not to say, however, that Defendant Lanoie's lack of diligence forecloses a showing of good cause to set aside the default... his conduct was not egregious... it does so only slightly, and fails to outweigh those factors which favor setting aside the default.”
Cautions
In auditing a contractual attorneys'-fee request, he cross-checked the substance of the underlying filings against the hours billed for them, and disallowed time that appeared duplicative between attorneys, excessive for the complexity of the document actually produced, or attributable to paralegal work or firm overhead rather than legal services.
“This Court's role 'as the guarantor of fairness obligates it not to accept uncritically what lawyers self-servingly suggest is reasonable compensation for their services.'”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“it is ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
Order on a joint motion setting the briefing schedule and page limits for the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment; not a ruling on a dispositive motion. "it is hereby ORDERED that the Joint Motion be, and it is hereby GRANTED, in part, and that the briefing schedule and page limitations for Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be..."
“the Court will grant Plaintiffs' Motion as to Counts I, II, and III, and deny Plaintiffs' Motion as to Count IV.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be, and it is hereby, GRANTED on Count I to the extent it encompasses the period prior to January 1, 2003, and is otherwise DENIED”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be, and it is hereby, GRANTED as to Count I to the extent it encompasses the period on and after January 1, 2003, and is otherwise DENIED”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be, and it is hereby, GRANTED as to Counts II and III in their entirety”
“Defendants' Motion for Oral Argument (Docket Item No. 154) be, and it is hereby, DENIED as the Court has no need for oral argument.”
“Plaintiffs' Appeal to the District Court of the Magistrate Judge's June 14, 2005, Decision (Docket Item No. 116) is MOOT”
“After weighing the factors suggested in Roberts, the Court is persuaded that the interests of justice do not justify the Court granting the requested reconsideration. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“the Court APPROVES the award of Eighty-Five Thousand Dollars ($85,000) in attorneys' fees in this case.”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction be, and it is hereby, GRANTED as to Defendants Tom Allison, Terry LeClere, and Montylee Watt, and the Complaint is hereby DISMISSED as to those Defendants without prejudice, and is DENIED as to Defendants Applied Microwave Technologies, Inc. and Timothy Scheurs”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Count V for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“Defendants' Motion to Transfer Case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“it is ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Oral Argument (Docket Item No. 9) be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“Defendant Giddings & Lewis Machine Tools LLC's Motion to Preclude Testimony from Plaintiff's Expert Ralph Barnett be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“That sparse factual predicate does not permit the Court to articulate a basis for ‘a deliberative and properly considered discretionary decision’ ... Accordingly, the motion is hereby DENIED.”
“the Court concludes that there are material issues of fact including, inter alia, whether any conduct on the part of Phoenix, Inc. caused the Plaintiff's injuries. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Third-Party Defendant Phoenix Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
“the Court concludes that there are material issues of fact including, inter alia, whether any conduct on the part of CNC Engineering, Inc. caused the Plaintiff's injuries. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Third-Party Defendant CNC Engineering Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
His directly-assigned docket in this era included a broad general civil docket typical of a senior district judge carrying a reduced but still active caseload: contract and insurance disputes, ERISA and labor cases, employment discrimination, products liability, prisoner civil-rights and habeas petitions, trademark and trade-secret disputes, and a share of Social Security disability appeals and criminal matters referred through the district's magistrate judges.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Carter was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2021.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
A historical record
Judge Carter no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.