Thomas Porter Hawley

United States District Court for the District of Nevada district Retired 1906 · served 1890–1906 Appointed by Benjamin Harrison (Republican) 28 signed orders read

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

How Judge Hawley decides

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

What persuades

Hawley required creditors opposing bankruptcy discharge to prove a statutory ground with satisfactory evidence; suspicion was insufficient.

“Specifications in opposition to a bankrupt’s application for a discharge, and the proofs in support thereof, should be clear, positive, and direct.”

He treated the substance and evident intent of a corporate contract as controlling over technical signature objections.

“The intention of the parties is always the prevailing consideration in the construction of this class of contracts, and the intent is clearly stated in the complaint and shown upon the face of the contract.”

Longstanding acts of control and maintenance persuaded Hawley that a tailings reservoir had not been abandoned.

“There was never any abandonment of the premises by the defendants”

Procedural preferences

Hawley focused pleading review on ultimate facts rather than evidentiary detail.

“The evidence need not be pleaded.”

He rejected pleading objections that were purely technical and did not undermine the substance of the claim.

“The first point of the demurrer is purely technical, and is devoid of merit.”

He permitted amendment where misjoined parties and claims could be corrected to conform to the true facts.

“the plaintiff will be given the opportunity to again amend the complaint so as to conform to the true facts as they exist”

Cautions

Hawley strictly enforced the limits of federal-question jurisdiction when federal law appeared only as an anticipated defense.

“a suggestion of one party that the other will or may set up a claim under the constitution or laws of the United States does not make the suit one arising under that constitution or those laws.”

A party seeking equitable relief needed proof of incapacity or undue influence beyond family relationship and suspicion.

“the complainant in this case has failed to introduce sufficient proof to justify the court in setting aside the instruments.”

Hawley treated a threat of irreparable injury as sufficient for preventive injunctive relief before the harm occurred.

“satisfactory proof that defendants threaten Hie 'Commission of a wrong which is within tlieir power is sufficient ground to justify the relief.”

Signed rulings

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

Drake v. Found Treasure Mining Co.
· 1892-11-07
Motions to strike (defendant) Denied

“The motion to strike out the amended complaint is denied”

Demurrer (defendant) Denied

“the demurrer is overruled.”

Sutro v. Lincoln County
· 1894-06-18
Claim for judgment (plaintiffs) Granted

“Upon the authority of that case, judgment is hereby directed to be entered in favor of the plaintiffs herein, as prayed for in the respective complaints.”

In re Brule
· 1895-12-28

Hawley treated an attempt to keep a known witness from court through bribery or persuasion as contempt even though the witness had not yet been subpoenaed: “The statute applies to all cases, where a person who it is known will be a witness at the trial is solicited and bribed to hide, or to absent himself from the place of trial, or to secrete himself so that he cannot be subpoenaed.”

Wise v. Nixon
· 1897-01-25
Demurrer (defendants) Granted

“The demurrer is sustained and the bill dismissed, without prejudice to complainant’s right to bring the action in the state court.”

Silver Peak Mines v. Hanchett
· 1897-05-21
Motion to dissolve attachment (defendant) Denied

“The motion to dissolve the attachment is overruled.”

Union Mill & Mining Co. v. Warren
· 1897-09-13
Demurrer (defendants) Denied

“The demurrer is overruled.”

In re Nathan
· 1899-03-13
Motion for injunction (petitioning creditors) Granted

“In the light of all the facts, I am of opinion that the injunction against Cohn should be issued as prayed for by the petitioners. It is so ordered.”

Norcross v. Nathan
· 1900-01-23
Demurrer (defendants) Denied

“The demurrer is overruled.”

In re McGurn
· 1900-06-16
Bankruptcy discharge petition (bankrupt) Granted

“The petitioner is entitled to his discharge.”

United States v. Miller
· 1901-01-11
Motion for judgment of acquittal (defendant) Denied

“Motion denied.”

Hood v. Hampton Plains Exploration Co.
· 1901-04-01
Objection to taxation of costs (defendant) Denied

“The ruling of the clerk is affirmed.”

Occidental Consolidated Mining Co. v. Comstock Tunnel Co.
· 1901-09-02
Motion for more definite statement (defendant) Denied

“Motion denied”

Demurrer (defendant) Denied

“demurrer overruled.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The 28 reviewed decisions cover a broad litigation sample, but they do not establish the distribution of Hawley's full caseload.

A historical record

Judge Hawley 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.