Wilfred Feinberg

How Judge Feinberg rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Position
district
Status
Elevated to a higher court
Served
1962–1966
Appointed by
John F. Kennedy (Democratic)
Commissioned
1962-03-17
Education
Columbia College, B.A., 1940; Columbia Law School, LL.B., 1946
Signed orders read
17

How Judge Feinberg decides

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

What persuades

Feinberg treated voluntary cessation as insufficient by itself to moot alleged public-law violations when the challenged relationship could recur.

“[V]oluntary cessation of allegedly illegal conduct does not deprive the tribunal of power to hear and determine the case”

He applied controlling circuit precedent to allow fraudulent concealment to toll the federal antitrust limitations period.

“Moviecolor makes abundantly clear the view of the Court of Appeals that fraudulent concealment applies to Section 4B.”

He recognized original design choices in a realistic artificial flower as copyrightable and sufficient for preliminary relief against close copying.

“plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction should be and hereby is granted as to both defendants.”

Procedural preferences

Feinberg resisted summary judgment when an ambiguous agreement required factual development through negotiation history and past practice.

“Because I feel there are genuine issues of fact material to the question of the compulsory nature of the arbitration clause in this case, the motions for summary judgment are denied.”

He treated an adjudication as final enough for collateral estoppel when the rendering court intended a conclusive decision, even though the broader litigation continued.

“Applying the tests set forth in these cases, I conclude that Judge Stephenson’s decision in Iowa is final enough for the application of the doctrine of collateral estoppel.”

Signed rulings

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

Cooper v. Sinclair Refining Co.
· 1961-12-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, the motion is denied.”

Brown v. Bullock
· 1961-12-11
Motion to compel production (plaintiffs) Granted

“Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion will be granted as requested unless within ten days from entry of the order hereon”

Saucy Susan Products, Inc. v. Allied Oil English, Inc.
· 1961-12-21
Motion to stay pending arbitration (defendants) Granted

“For all of the above reasons, therefore, defendants’ motion for a stay pending arbitration is granted.”

Prestige Floral v. California Artificial Flower Co.
· 1962-01-05
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“Consequently, plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction should be and hereby is granted as to both defendants.”

Baum v. Turel
· 1962-06-27
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted in part

“For the reasons indicated below, the motion is granted as to the first and second causes of action in the complaint and denied as to the third.”

Atlantic City Electric Co. v. General Electric Co.
· 1962-07-11
Motions to strike (defendants) Denied

“I cannot agree with these assumptions. Accordingly, on what I conceive to be the clear authority of Movie-color, defendants’ motion is denied.”

Atlantic City Electric Co. v. General Electric Co.
· 1962-07-18
Motions to strike (defendants) Granted in part

“Defendants’ second motion is otherwise denied, except as to the sentences imposed and certain references to the indictments.”

Motions to strike (defendants) Granted in part

“Accordingly, this portion of the motion is granted as to these defendants and otherwise denied.”

Flight Engineers International Ass'n v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.
· 1962-08-10
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff union) Denied

“Accordingly, under all the circumstances, the motion for preliminary injunction should be denied.”

United Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers v. General Electric Co.
· 1962-09-13
Summary judgment (plaintiff union) Denied

“The Union’s motion and the Company’s motion are both denied and the case should be tried expeditiously.”

Summary judgment (defendant company) Denied
Precise Imports Corp. v. Kelly
· 1963-06-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant collector) Denied

“the Collector’s motion to dismiss should be denied.”

Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Denied

“Therefore, plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is denied,”

Harvey v. Calhoon
· 1963-08-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motion to dismiss is granted and the application for a preliminary injunction is denied.”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiffs) Denied
Hawkins v. General Controls Corp.
· 1964-01-29
Motions to transfer (plaintiff) Denied

“Accordingly, the motion for transfer will be denied.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

No assigned historical docket was returned, so this profile makes no claim about Feinberg's district-era caseload mix, case durations, or docket-wide motion timing.

A historical record

Judge Feinberg 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.