Peter Constantine Economus
Judge Economus 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.
“Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. (Dkt. # 42)”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's Remaining Federal and State Law Claims is hereby GRANTED. (Dkt. # 22). Judgment is entered in favor of Defendants.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 44) is DENIED.”
“Canton's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. All of Plaintiffs' federal claims are hereby DISMISSED. In addition, the Court REMANDS Plaintiffs' breach of contract claims to the Court of Common Pleas for Stark County.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Government may reduce to judgment its tax assessments against Douglas. The Government's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. (Dkt. # 18).”
“For the reasons discussed above, the Court hereby DENIES as MOOT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 10.)”
“The Defendant's motion to suppress in untimely and thus any argument for suppression is waived. He also has not shown good cause for relief from the waiver. Accordingly, the Motion To Suppress is denied.”
“This trial date already has been continued numerous times. In addition, the Defendant presents no valid basis for yet another continuance. Accordingly, the motion is denied.”
“Because Thomas failed to satisfy both time limitations requirements under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b), and has failed to present sufficient grounds for equitable tolling, this Court does not possess subject matter jurisdiction to hear Thomas' claims. Accordingly, the Government's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. (Dkt. # 6). The instant action is hereby DISMISSED.”
“the Court hereby DENIES Defendant Malcolm A. Sales' July 15, 2008 Motion to Suppress Evidence and DENIES Defendant Tommy A. Gonzales' July 21, 2008 Motion to Suppress Evidence. (Dkt. # 14, 18).”
“Defendants C.B. Fleet Co., Inc., et al.'s ‘Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order Granting Harris's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint’ is GRANTED. (Dkt. # 30). Harris' Amended Complaint (Dkt. # 28) shall be STRICKEN from the record.”
“Harris' motion for sanctions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and LR 7.1(i) is DENIED. (Dkt. # 31).”
“Defendant Henry W. Eisenberg, M.D.'s ‘Motion for Extension of Time to Move, Plead, or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint’ is DENIED as MOOT. (Dkt. #s 37).”
“Defendants' Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. (Dkt. # 264). The Motion is GRANTED with respect to damages for unjust enrichment. The jury's award of unjust enrichment damages shall be vacated. The Motion is DENIED as to the issue of liability for misappropriation.”
“Defendants Alternative Motion for New Trial is hereby DENIED. (Dkt. # 264).”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for New Trial is hereby DENIED. (Dkt. # 265).”
“Plaintiffs have failed to show that Defendants acted willfully and maliciously in misappropriating Allied's trade secrets. Therefore, Plaintiffs' Motion to Mold Verdict for Attorneys' Fees is hereby DENIED. (Dkt. # 252).”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Prejudgment Interest is hereby DENIED. (Dkt. # 254).”
“the petition is denied and this action is dismissed pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
A sample from Judge Economus's active-era Youngstown docket is weighted toward state and federal prisoner petitions, with additional civil-rights, employment, benefits, contract, insurance, fraud, forfeiture, and racketeering matters. Historically significant assigned cases include Reed v. Rhodes, Smith v. Weyandt, and the Industrial Excess Landfill environmental litigation. Some long-running matters were inherited or reassigned and do not necessarily represent cases he handled from filing.
A historical record
Judge Economus 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.