Girard Edward Kalbfleisch

United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio district Deceased · served 1959–1990 Appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 24 signed orders read

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

Signed rulings

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

Gray v. Richardson
· 1972-02-28
Summary judgment (government) Granted

“It is ordered that the defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted and that the decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare is affirmed and the complaint is dismissed.”

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. United States
· 1963-05-02
Motion to set aside agency order (plaintiffs) Denied

“The plaintiffs’ contention that the Commission failed to set out sufficient findings of fact to support its refusal to impose protective labor conditions is not supported either by the law or by the record, and its motion to set aside the order of the Commission upon this basis will be denied.”

Volkswagen of America, Inc. v. S.S. Silver Isle
· 1966-03-29
Motions to dismiss (respondents) Denied

“Respondents have not shown they will be deprived of substantial justice in a United States court; therefore, the motion to dismiss will be overruled.”

Vernay Laboratories, Inc. v. Industrial Electronic Rubber Co.
· 1964-09-15
Request for oral hearing (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s request for an oral hearing on its motion for summary judgment will be denied since the Court can dispose of the questions presented without need of an oral hearing.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Therefore, the Court will overrule defendant’s motion for summary judgment.”

Objections to interrogatories (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s objections to interrogatories 2 through 5 will be overruled.”

Motion to file supplemental complaint (plaintiff) Granted

“In the interest of efficient disposition of the controversy, the Court will order that plaintiff’s motion to file a supplemental complaint be sustained.”

Britt v. Cyril Bath Company
· 1968-09-16
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint is sustained.”

Motion for leave to file reply (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion filed March 6, 1968 for leave to file a reply, brief in support of the motion to dismiss is sustained.”

Motions for protective orders (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motions filed November 7, 1967 and February 9, 1968 for protective orders staying the taking of the depositions of the defendants Robert A. MaeKenzie, Elizabeth Bath MacKenzie, John H. Leonard, George P. Bickford, and Georgiana Bath are sustained.”

Motion to disqualify counsel and strike (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion filed January 8, 1968 to disqualify counsel for defendants and to strike defendants’ motions from the files is overruled.”

Motion for show cause and contempt (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion filed March 1, 1968 to show cause why defendants Elizabeth Bath MacKenzie and Georgiana Bath should not be held in contempt of court and for an oral hearing, and plaintiff’s motion filed April 15, 1968 for leave to file a reply brief to plaintiff’s motion to disqualify counsel for defendants and to strike defendants’ papers are overruled.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment filed January 10, 1968 and plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment are moot and therefore are overruled.”

Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration and for an oral hearing thereon are overruled.”

Partis v. Miller Equipment Co.
· 1970-04-29
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“Accordingly, it is ordered that the motions are sustained and the complaint is dismissed as to defendants North & Judd Manufacturing Company and E. H. Bnhrke Company, Inc..”

Blackmore v. McKeon
· 1960-03-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“The motion, therefore, will be overruled.”

Lempco Automotive, Inc. v. Local 1444, International Ass'n of Machinists
· 1960-06-10
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Moot / procedural

“There no longer being an actual controversy between the parties herein, defendants’ motion to dismiss will be sustained.”

Cline v. New York Central Railroad
· 1961-03-15
Motions to transfer (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion will be overruled.”

Barrows v. Central Motor Lines, Inc.
· 1961-05-15
Motions to transfer (defendants) Denied

“Accordingly, the motions to transfer in the above cases will be overruled.”

Objections to interrogatory (defendant) Granted in part

“The objections to interrogatory 9(a), (b) and (e) will be overruled. The objections to interrogatory 9(c) also will be overruled provided it is limited to names and addresses of known witnesses. Interrogatory 9(d) is too broad and the objections thereto will be sustained.”

Kakos v. Ribicoff
· 1962-09-12
Social security appeal (claimant) Denied

“Therefore, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, the Court will enter judgment affirming the decision of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.”

Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Carpenter Printing Co.
· 1964-09-18
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment will be overruled.”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment will be overruled.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

No assigned historical case set was enumerable, so no case-mix or duration claim is made.

A historical record

Judge Kalbfleisch 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.