Wayne Edward Alley

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma district No longer serving Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 9 signed orders read

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

How Judge Alley decides

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

What persuades

He treats clear contract text as controlling over a party’s subjective, unexpressed understanding, particularly at summary judgment.

“These limitations do not appear in the contract, however, and Hammons does not contend that such limitations were orally discussed”

When interpreting coverage, he examines the full policy structure rather than accepting the issue as framed by the parties, including exclusions and alternative definitions that may be dispositive.

“After reviewing the parties’ submissions, however, the Court has determined that the issue presented for decision is not dis-positive and has identified additional issues for briefing by the parties”

Procedural preferences

A failure to respond may cause a motion to be treated as confessed, but he still performs an independent merits analysis before dismissing a claim.

“Although the motion is deemed confessed pursuant to Local Court Rule 14(A), the Court shall render a decision on the merits.”

He requires parties to use a procedural device that can actually supply the requested relief; a motion to strike cannot substitute for a properly supported dispositive motion.

“Defendants have chosen an improper procedural device for raising their defense that plaintiffs agreed to waive certain claims or theories of recovery.”

Cautions

Repeated jurisdictionally defective removal can prompt fees and costs even when the court initially extends leniency to a self-represented litigant.

“Should Mr. Devous engage in continued efforts to pursue removal, however, the Court may not be so indulgent in the future.”

Signed rulings

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

United States v. Wilson
· 1997-09-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For all of these reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss the revocation petition is DENIED.”

Farm Credit Bank of Wichita v. Devous
· 1996-08-15
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“Accordingly, the motion to remand of plaintiff Farm Credit Bank of Wichita is GRANTED.”

Motion for attorney fees costs and expenses (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion for attorney’s fees, costs and expenses, included in the motion to remand, is DENIED.”

Hammons v. Enterprise Leasing Co.-Southwest
· 1998-02-26
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For these reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Liability of Defendant is DENIED.”

Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Beaton v. Reynolds, Ridings, Vogt & Morgan, P.L.L.C.
· 1998-01-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For these reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance v. Midwest Computers & More
· 2001-06-26
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED; Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied
Hagy v. American Honda Motor Co.
· 2000-12-20
Judgment on the pleadings (American Honda Motor Co.) Denied

“Therefore, defendants’ pending motions to enter judgment, dismiss, stay, and strike [Docs. 10,12 & 16] are DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (American Honda Motor Co.) Denied
Motions to stay (American Honda Motor Co.) Denied
Motions to strike (American Honda Motor Co.) Denied
Judgment on the pleadings (Honda R & D Co., Ltd.) Denied
Summary judgment (Honda R & D Co., Ltd.) Denied
Motions to dismiss (Honda R & D Co., Ltd.) Denied
Motions to stay (Honda R & D Co., Ltd.) Denied
Motions to strike (Honda R & D Co., Ltd.) Denied
Judgment on the pleadings (Honda Motor Co., Ltd.) Denied
Motions to dismiss (Honda Motor Co., Ltd.) Denied
Motions to stay (Honda Motor Co., Ltd.) Denied
Motions to strike (Honda Motor Co., Ltd.) Denied
Melton ex rel. White v. White
· 1994-03-18
Motion to realign parties (defendant) Denied

“Prudential’s Motion To Realign Parties is DENIED.”

Melton ex rel. White v. White
· 1994-03-18
Motion for judgment (defendant) Granted

“In sum, Prudential’s Motion For Judgment, Permanent Injunction and Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED.”

Motion for permanent injunction (defendant) Granted
Motion for attorney fees (defendant) Granted
Carter v. State Insurance Fund
· 1995-02-21
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Motion to Dismiss of defendant, the State Insurance Fund, is GRANTED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The available historical index shows a general federal docket that included banking, securities, contract, civil-rights, prisoner, and personal-injury matters. No representative motion-timeline sample is available.

A historical record

Judge Alley 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.