Martin Francis Loughlin

United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire district Retired 1995 · served 1979–1995 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 21 signed orders read

Judge Loughlin no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Loughlin decides

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

What persuades

Loughlin allowed a retaliatory-discharge claim to proceed when the alleged firing punished an employee for pursuing a legal remedy on behalf of his injured child.

“The plaintiff apparently was retaliated against by the defendant through its agent.”

Loughlin treated the substance and social purpose of a support obligation as more important than the form of the document that created it.

“In bankruptcy proceedings, equity requires that the substance of the debt should prevail over the form where appropriate.”

Procedural preferences

Loughlin required a party seeking transfer to support convenience and fairness arguments with evidence rather than conclusions.

“The defendant has failed to present any evidence which would support the transfer of this case under two of the three factors set out in § 1404(a)”

Loughlin protected pro se litigants from unfair disadvantage while holding them to the same evidentiary boundaries as represented parties.

“shall not be given any edge over defendants' counsel.”

Loughlin compelled relevant peer-review material when the record showed the privilege had been waived and the material was created for medical improvement rather than litigation.

“This court thus orders the defendants to produce all the records of the peer review for the purpose of discovery.”

Cautions

Loughlin enforced attorney-client confidentiality when the interviewee reasonably believed the lawyer represented him, even in response to a grand-jury subpoena.

“His interview with Attorney Boeckeler clearly falls within this privilege.”

Signed rulings

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

Berlo v. McCoy
· 1989-02-06
Motion to strike jury demand (defendant) Granted

“the defendant’s motion to strike jury demand (Doc. # 26) is hereby granted.”

Edward B. v. Brunelle
· 1986-10-17
Motion to reinstate claims (plaintiff-intervenors) Denied

“Plaintiffs' motion to reinstate claims (Doc. # 55) is denied.”

Brock v. American Messenger Service, Inc.
· 1986-10-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant Geoffrey Grenert) Denied

“Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. # 5) and defendant’s motion for change of venue (Doc. # 6) are denied.”

Motions to transfer (defendant Geoffrey Grenert) Denied
Lyons v. Powell
· 1989-12-28
Motions to dismiss (federal defendants) Denied

“The motion to dismiss is denied as is the motion for summary judgment.”

Summary judgment (federal defendants) Denied
Shine v. Shine (In re Shine)
· 1986-01-17
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant Marguerite Shine) Granted

“the decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Hampshire declaring defendant’s debt to plaintiff discharge-able in bankruptcy is hereby reversed.”

Boyle v. Board of Police Commissioners of the City of Portsmouth
· 1989-01-20
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ Motion is denied.”

Corbett v. Keene Co-Operative Bank
· 1980-10-06
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiffs) Granted

“Motion granted.”

Corinthian Pool Corp. v. National Northeast Corp.
· 1980-06-26
Motion to stay proceedings (defendant) Granted

“the motion to stay be granted.”

Slaiby v. Rassman (In re Slaiby)
· 1985-10-23
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant creditors) Denied

“this court finds that the order of the bankruptcy court is not clearly erroneous and is affirmed.”

Loopman v. Hurley
· 1979-08-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant Hurley) Granted

“The Court grants defendant Hurley’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint # 2.”

Hebert v. Post Machinery Co.
· 1980-08-22
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the original complaint filed by plaintiff is granted.”

Theberge v. Transportation Systems
· 1984-11-27
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted for both actions.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The available historical slice contains twenty cases filed during Loughlin's first four months on the court, all later terminated. Because the archive returned no nature-of-suit labels and no entry timelines, it supports only a narrow duration snapshot, not a career-wide caseload description.

A historical record

Judge Loughlin 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.