James Focht McClure Jr.
Judge McClure no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge McClure decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
McClure separated preempted vehicle-design theories from independent theories and allowed the latter to proceed where they did not conflict with the federal regulatory choice.
“To the extent that plaintiffs’ defective design action is based on the absence of an adequate seat back, seat track mechanism, and/or knee bolster, it is not preempted because no actual conflict with the federal regulatory scheme exists.”
Procedural preferences
He treated reconsideration as exceptional relief requiring more than renewed disagreement with the original ruling.
“Reconsideration of judgment is an extraordinary remedy; therefore, such motions are to be granted sparingly.”
Cautions
He expected briefing to stay focused on the governing legal issues rather than broader social or political advocacy.
“A legal brief, however, is not a soapbox for espousing the social and political views of a party.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff’s second supplemental motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability against defendants Louis Serafini, Alfred Bernabei, Ernest Buttafoco, and Michael J. Naples, Jr., individually and trading as Empire Contracting Company., filed September 25, 1989, is granted.”
“Geisinger Health Plan’s motion (record document #4, filed February 18, 1992) to intervene is denied.”
“For all of these reasons, Harrison’s motion to suppress will be denied.”
“NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT defendants’ motion (record document no. 7) to dismiss is denied.”
“NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT plaintiffs motion (record document no. 26) for leave to file an amended complaint is denied.”
“For the reasons stated in this memorandum, we will grant Berwick’s motion to strike jury demand and for partial summary judgment, and we will grant plaintiffs motion to amend plaintiffs response to Berwick’s first request for admissions.”
“Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.”
“Based on the foregoing, the court will grant in part and deny in part defendants’ motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).”
“Plaintiffs’ motion for oral argument with respect to defendants’ motion for summary judgment will be denied.”
“For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion will be denied.”
“Based on the foregoing reasons, the Hit-ties’ motion for reconsideration will be denied.”
“Defendant Ward Manufacturing, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment (record document no. 41, filed April 17, 2000) is granted.”
“Defendant E.A. Ward Excavating, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment (record document no. 36, filed April 17, 2000) is granted.”
“Third-party defendant Welliver-McGuire, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment (record document no. 38, filed April 17, 2000) is granted.”
“Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment as to liability (record doc. no. 27) is denied.”
“Defendants’ .motion for summary judgment (record doc. no. 28) is granted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 248 days (N = 10).
The twenty enumerated May 1990 cases included eight prisoner civil-rights matters, two motor-vehicle injury cases, two habeas petitions, two labor matters, and one each involving securities, insurance, contract, employment civil rights, antitrust, and product liability. All twenty were terminated. This narrow first-month cohort does not establish McClure's tenure-wide caseload mix.
A historical record
Judge McClure 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.