Douglas Woodruff Hillman
Judge Hillman no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Hillman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Hillman required evidence connecting a challenged employment decision to the alleged national-origin bias rather than speculation about motive.
“Plaintiffs premise that Kleine wanted to avoid hiring a person with a foreign accent is unsupported in the record.”
He required antitrust complaints to allege facts supporting market power in a defined geographic market.
“Nowhere in plaintiff’s complaint is there any allegation that defendant has market power in a specific geographical area.”
Hillman treated the underlying conduct, rather than the identity of the sovereign bringing a later charge, as central to whether a prior invocation of counsel barred questioning.
“But rather, whether the allegedly criminal behavior which was the subject of the post-arraignment investigation is different than the allegedly criminal behavior on which the first charge is based.”
Procedural preferences
Hillman expected counsel in complex litigation to follow captioning and case-management details carefully.
“Although it is easy to see why confusion results given the nature and history of these actions, the court urges all counsel to pay attention to the details so that progress will continue without impediment.”
He rejected relation back when a proposed amendment introduced a separate injury and a different set of operative facts.
“Two unrelated injuries do not arise from the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence, just because they happened a few days apart.”
Hillman did not treat counsel's mistaken reading of clear filing deadlines as excusable neglect.
“In summary, we have in this case a conscious decision made by an attorney based upon ignorance of the law.”
Cautions
Hillman allowed innovative legal arguments but expected counsel to identify existing law and explain a principled extension; unsupported federal claims risked sanctions.
“Lawyers must not be discouraged from making new and innovative arguments for extension of Constitutional claims. When this is done, however, one expects an attorney to set forth a statement of the law as it exists and then explain by clear argument why and how it might properly be extended by the judiciary.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiffs have removed the offending language from the fourth amended complaint, however, so the court will dismiss the motion to strike as moot.”
“Accordingly, the court will deny the motion to dismiss.”
“The court will grant the motion to dismiss, and dismiss the State of Michigan with prejudice.”
“Accordingly, the court will deny Green-burg’s motion to set aside the entry of default.”
“Greenburg’s motion to stay plaintiffs' claims against him pending the final outcome of related criminal proceedings will likewise be denied.”
“Hamilton’s motions are now moot. The court will consequently dismiss the motions without prejudice.”
“Their motion is therefore moot, and will be dismissed.”
“Accordingly, for the reasons stated, the motion to dismiss filed by defendant Grand Traverse County Prosecutor’s Office is GRANTED, and plaintiffs’ claims against this defendant are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motions to dismiss filed by the State of Michigan, the Michigan State Police Department, Colonel Gerald Hough, and Lieutenant Orlin Street are GRANTED, and plaintiffs’ claims against these defendants are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the reasons stated above, plaintiff’s motion to amend is denied, and defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, converted to a Rule 56 motion for summary judgment, is granted, and plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with full prejudice.”
“For the reasons stated above, defendant’s motion for summary judgment on count II is granted.”
“Defendant’s motion to dismiss count IV pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is granted”
“in the alternative, defendant’s motion for summary judgment on count IV is granted.”
“In accordance with the foregoing analysis, summary judgment will be entered for defendants and the case is dismissed.”
“the Government’s motion for summary judgment is granted”
“summary judgment is denied. Each party shall bear its own costs.”
“In the absence of a genuine issue of any material fact, the court shall grant the motions for summary judgment by the defendants.”
“Judgment shall be entered for defendant. This case is dismissed.”
“In conclusion, defendant’s motion to suppress the gun obtained from him on June 5, 1987, is denied, as is his motion to suppress the statements given to the state agents on June 5, 1987, and the photographic and in-court identifications. Defendant’s motion to suppress the statements given to the federal agents on June 11, 1987 is granted.”
“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.”
“The magistrate’s order is vacated and plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint is denied.”
“Because I do not find exceptional and extraordinary circumstances in this case, plaintiffs’ request for relief under Rule 60(b)(1) and 60(b)(6) is denied.”
“In conclusion, defendant Keane’s motion is granted and pursuant to Rule 11 and Local Rule 49, attorney Bean is sanctioned with payment of defendant Keane’s attorneys’ fees in the amount of $2,150.00.”
“Defendant Blumer’s motion is denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 1729 days (N = 5).
The twenty enumerated cases in the returned 1983-1987 filing cohort included contract and product-liability disputes, civil-rights and prisoner matters, employee-benefit cases, statutory actions, racketeering claims, insurance, patents, negotiable instruments, personal injury, and habeas review. The five randomized sample dockets were all terminated and retained no motion-entry text.
A historical record
Judge Hillman 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.