Paul Benson
Judge Benson no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Benson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Benson treated federal-state comity as a reason to avoid pretrial interference when the state process could still resolve the asserted defense.
“This court will not interfere with the state judicial process and the pending criminal prosecution.”
He required government agencies to make a genuine settlement effort before seeking judicial enforcement.
“The ‘all or nothing’ approach of the EEOC in this case flies in the face of the intent of sex discrimination legislation.”
Procedural preferences
Benson described summary judgment as exceptional and required the movant to eliminate genuine controversy.
“Summary judgment is an extreme remedy and it is not to be entered unless the moving party establishes its right to a judgment in its favor with such clarity as to leave no room for controversy and the other party is not entitled to recover under any discernible circumstances.”
He expected counsel to attempt informal resolution before asking the court to decide a discovery dispute.
“Upon a review of the record, it is not clearly apparent that the parties have made a good faith effort to informally resolve their differences on this issue, if any differences still exist. Therefore the court will not act on the motion.”
Cautions
Benson applied the Establishment Clause by testing both legislative purpose and practical advancement of religion.
“The statute fails to meet two of the three criteria required to withstand the Establishment Clause challenge. It does not serve a secular legislative purpose and it advances religion.”
He required a recusal motion to identify personal or extrajudicial bias rather than rely on disagreement with judicial rulings.
“Defendant has failed to identify or demonstrate any personal or extrajudicial bias or prejudice on the part of this court, or state any facts from which the impartiality of the presiding judge in the case might reasonably be questioned.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that judgment be entered dismissing the case.”
“IT IS ORDERED that petitioner’s request for federal habeas corpus relief is denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Clark’s motions for summary judgment in Civil No. 4839 and Civil No. 4875 are DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to compel answers to interrogatories is denied.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to compel defendants to disclose correspondence and memorandums is denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant’s counterclaim is granted.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the indictment against the defendant is dismissed.”
“IT IS ORDERED defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“IT IS ORDERED the case is remanded to Cass County District Court, East Central Judicial District of North Dakota, and under cover of a certified copy of this order of remand, all original filings in this case subsequent to removal will be mailed to the clerk of the state court.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the motion to sever the third-party claim from the main action is denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted, without prejudice, for failure to attempt conciliation of the claim sued upon.”
“IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 2651 and N.D.Cent.Code ch. 26-41 are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is DENIED as to plaintiff’s third party beneficiary claim.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted, and that plaintiff have judgment against defendant in the amount of $21,-740.00 plus interest at the legal rate of 6% from November 12, 1980 to date of judgment.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The twenty-one reviewed decisions cover varied litigation but do not establish the distribution of Benson’s full caseload.
A historical record
Judge Benson 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.