A. Leon Higginbotham Jr.

How Judge Higginbotham rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Position
district
Status
Deceased
Served
1964–1998
Appointed by
Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic)
Commissioned
1964-03-17
Education
Antioch College, B.A., 1949; Yale Law School, LL.B., 1952
Signed orders read
24

How Judge Higginbotham decides

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

What persuades

He preserved a chosen forum when the moving party had not shown that convenience strongly favored transfer.

“The burden is on the moving party to establish that a balancing of proper interests weigh in favor of the transfer, and ‘ . . . unless the balance of convenience of the parties is strongly in favor of the defendant, the plaintiff’s choice of forum should prevail.’”

He protected press materials in civil discovery when the requesting parties showed neither a particularized need nor the absence of alternative sources.

“The plaintiffs have shown no particularized need for these affidavits; there has not even been a demonstration that the information could not be secured from alternative sources.”

Procedural preferences

He treated the discovery rules as enforceable obligations designed to keep litigation fair and efficient.

“The provisions governing discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are more than mere procedural guidelines to be consulted at the pleasure of a party to a federal suit.”

Cautions

A request for federal relief failed when Congress had expressly withdrawn jurisdiction over the administrative benefit determination at issue.

“Thus, as this Court lacks jurisdiction in this matter, defendants’ motion to dismiss Mr. Wexler’s Complaint is granted”

Signed rulings

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

Gilchrist v. Mitsui Sempaku K.K.
· 1967-04-26
Motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict (third-party defendant Jarka Corporation) Denied

“the motion of Jarka Corporation for judgment n. o. v., or in the alternative, for a new trial is denied.”

Motion for new trial (third-party defendant Jarka Corporation) Denied
Polin v. Conductron Corp.
· 1970-03-31
Motion to amend order (defendants) Denied

“defendants’ motions to amend the Order of February 4, 1970, to stay these proceedings, and to certify the Order of February 4, 1970, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292, are in each and every respect denied.”

Motion for stay (defendants) Denied
Motion to certify interlocutory appeal (defendants) Denied
Petite v. Mehl Manufacturing Co.
· 1970-01-19
Motions to dismiss (third-party defendant Globe Rubber Products Corporation) Denied

“I must deny Globe Rubber Products Corporation’s motions for dismissal of the third-party complaint or summary judgment against Mehl Manufacturing Company.”

Summary judgment (third-party defendant Globe Rubber Products Corporation) Denied
Henning v. United States
· 1970-04-20
Summary judgment (United States) Granted

“summary judgment on behalf of the United States of America and against plaintiff is granted as to all that occurred while plaintiff was in the United States Army — the misreading of the x-ray and the consequent aggravation of his tubercular condition.”

Webb v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
· 1970-06-09
Motion for production of documents (plaintiffs) Denied

“plaintiffs’ motion for production of the written investigation reports referred to in defendants’ answer to plaintiffs’ Interrogatory No. 2 is denied.”

In re Spectrum Arena, Inc.
· 1971-12-23
Motion to modify reorganization plan (proponent Philip P. Kalodner) Denied

“Accordingly, I deny Mr. Kalodner’s two latest amendments (Docket Nos. 263, 265) also as a matter of sound judicial discretion.”

In re Spectrum Arena, Inc.
· 1971-12-23
Motion to modify reorganization plan (proponent Philip P. Kalodner) Denied

“the Petition to Alter or Modify the Trustees’ Plan by substituting therefore the Debtor’s Plan (Docket No. 275) is denied.”

LTM Corporation v. Edward M. Livingston & Sons, Inc.
· 1972-03-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons appearing hereinafter, I deny both of the defendant’s motions.”

Motion for more definite statement (defendant) Denied
Glick v. Blair & Co.
· 1975-01-22
Motion to enforce settlement (defendants) Granted

“The motion for a decree to enforce the settlement agreement is granted.”

Umbriac v. American Snacks, Inc.
· 1974-08-15
Motion to transfer venue (defendants) Denied

“Hence, defendants’ motion for a transfer to the District of Massachusetts is Denied.”

Glen Knit Industries, Ltd. v. E. F. Timme & Son, Inc.
· 1974-11-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s motion to dismiss must therefore be denied.”

Motion to transfer venue (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s motion for a transfer of venue must be denied.”

Duval v. United States
· 1974-11-11
Motion to vacate sentence (petitioner) Denied

“His motion under § 2255 and his alternative claim for relief, construed as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1970), must therefore be denied.”

Petition for writ of habeas corpus (petitioner) Denied

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

No assigned-judge docket cohort could be enumerated for the closed district tenure, so no caseload mix or duration statistic is reported.

A historical record

Judge Higginbotham 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.