Norman Harold Stahl

How Judge Stahl rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire
Position
District judge
Status
Deceased
Served
1990–1992
Appointed by
George H. W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
April 6, 1990
Education
Tufts College, B.A., 1952; Harvard Law School, LL.B., 1955
Signed orders read
20

About Judge Stahl

Norman H. Stahl was a judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Appointed by President George H.W. Bush, Judge Stahl received a commission on April 6, 1990. Judge Stahl left the court on June 30, 1992 on appointment to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

How Judge Stahl decides

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

What persuades

In McLean v. Gaudet, he held that the limitations issue could not fairly be resolved on a motion to dismiss.

“The statute of limitations issue cannot be decided fairly by reviewing a motion to dismiss.”

Procedural preferences

In Fish v. Bank Five for Savings, he held that the plaintiffs' prima facie showing was insufficient for the preliminary injunction they sought.

“Presenting a prima facie case is not enough to warrant the issuance of the extraordinary remedy that plaintiffs seek.”

Cautions

In Polyclad Laminates v. VITS Maschinenbau, he held that contracting parties were charged with knowledge that ordinary diligence would have revealed.

“the parties to a contract are chargeable with such knowledge that the exercise of ordinary diligence would have revealed.”

In Trask v. County of Strafford, he held that the court lacked jurisdiction over the remaining state-law issues after the federal claims were resolved.

“Without those claims, this Court is without subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the pendent state law issues raised in plaintiff’s complaint.”

Signed rulings

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

Place v. Cunningham
· 1990-12-21
Certificate of probable cause (petitioner) Granted

“Accordingly, the Court grants petitioner’s request for a certificate of probable cause to appeal the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.”

Fillo v. Dillon
· 1990-10-19
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant James Dillon’s motion to stay these proceedings ... (document no. 14) is granted.”

McLean v. Gaudet
· 1990-10-25
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“The statute of limitations issue cannot be decided fairly by reviewing a motion to dismiss. Accordingly, defendant’s motion to dismiss (document no. 5) is denied.”

Bivens v. Crowell
· 1990-10-15
Class certification (plaintiff) Denied

“Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion (document no. 6) is denied.”

Lerer v. Ultra Scan, Inc.
· 1990-12-11
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss (document no. 6) is granted.”

I.D. ex rel. E.D. v. Westmoreland School District
· 1991-08-01
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion to dismiss count I of the complaint (document no. 8) is granted.”

Fish v. Bank Five for Savings
· 1990-10-26
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“the Magistrate recommended that this Court deny plaintiff’s request for a preliminary injunction. ... Accordingly, the Court adopts the Magistrate’s October 22, 1990, Report and Recommendation, with modifications consistent with the discussion contained herein.”

Kissell v. Mann
· 1990-07-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons stated hereinabove, defendant’s motion to dismiss (doc. #4) is granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”

Carlson v. Grobman
· 1990-07-02
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.”

First Northern Bank v. Resolution Trust Corp.
· 1990-06-15
Motions to transfer (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion to transfer is hereby granted.”

United States v. McLaughlin
· 1991-01-29
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons stated herein, defendant David Carl Bruce’s motion to suppress is denied.”

Manchester Printing Pressmen & Assistants Union, Local No. 271-M v. Union Leader Corp.
· 1990-09-28
Motion for injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“Accordingly, because plaintiff has failed to show that the denial of the requested order will lead to irreparable harm, plaintiff’s motion for preliminary and permanent injunctions must be and herewith is denied.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • The available historical slice contains twenty cases filed during Stahl's first two months on the district court.
  • It includes government debt-recovery actions, civil-rights cases, insurance, copyright, contract, banking, welfare, personal-injury, and product-liability matters.
  • Because the slice is oldest-first and its sampled entry streams are empty, it is a narrow early-tenure snapshot rather than a career-wide caseload measure.

A historical record

Judge Stahl 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.