Frederick Alvin Daugherty
Judge Daugherty no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Daugherty decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He declined to create an additional constitutional remedy where Congress had supplied a comprehensive federal-employment scheme.
“This judicial intervention is disfavored whether it is accomplished by the creation of a damages remedy or injunctive relief.”
Cautions
He rejected a limitations defense where the filing date made the civil-rights action timely on the face of the record.
“it appears from the record before the Court herein that Plaintiff’s cause of action arose on November 27, 1978, and this action was commenced on April 7, 1980, it is obvious that Plaintiff’s action is timely.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, the district court's order imposing a fine in the amount of $150,706 for costs of incarceration and supervised release was inconsistent with the Sentencing Guidelines and should be and hereby is vacated.”
“The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas is AFFIRMED.”
“The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico is AFFIRMED.”
“Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Judgment filed in this case on October 27, 1980, and Defendant Jerry Botchlet Masonry Const. Co.’s (Botchlet) response thereto, the Court determines that said Motion should be granted except insofar as Plaintiff seeks post-judgment interest on the award of attorney’s fees herein.”
“On October 3, 1980 the Court entered an order granting said motion and dismissed Plaintiff’s action with prejudice.”
“Therefore, the Court finds and concludes that Defendant’s Motion to Bring in Third-Party Defendant [sic]” should be overruled.”
“Accordingly, Third Party Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted and Defendant’s Third Party Complaint should be dismissed.”
“Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Stay Proceedings should be granted and the instant action stayed pending appeal of said Order to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.”
A historical record
Judge Daugherty 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.