Edward William Day
How Judge Day decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Day required concrete evidence of irreparable injury before granting preliminary relief, not merely a viable underlying claim.
“the record is devoid of any evidence that the plaintiff may be unable to recover adequate damages from the defendants if it prevails in this suit.”
In administrative review, he upheld agency action when the record supplied substantial support and no arbitrary or capricious decisionmaking.
“there was ample evidence to warrant its finding that there was an immediate and urgent need for the services”
Procedural preferences
Day preserved claims at the pleading stage where constitutional allegations were legally cognizable and factual disputes remained unresolved.
“there is in this case a genuine issue of material fact which precludes the grant of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment”
He dismissed unexhausted internal-union claims without prejudice and expressly identified the allegations that could support amendment.
“Such dismissal is without prejudice to the right of the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint alleging exhaustion of intra-union remedies or facts upon which the Court may properly find that such exhaustion of remedies would be futile.”
Cautions
Day treated subjective chill without present objective harm or a specific future threat as insufficient for federal adjudication.
“Allegations of a subjective ‘chill’ are not an adequate substitute for a claim of specific present objective harm or a threat of specific future harm”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The motion to correct the sentence imposed on Count I is denied.”
“Accordingly, the ■motion for a preliminary injunction must ■be and it is denied.”
“Said motion to dismiss is accordingly denied.”
“Accordingly, judgment will be entered in favor of the plaintiff against said defendant, Pan Atlantic Cia Naviera, in the sum of $5,000, without interest, as stipulated.”
“the decedent’s claim for damages for conscious pain and suffering did not survive his death and that the plaintiff in her capacity as administratrix of his estate may not recover damages therefor”
“Therefore, the Court finds defendant guilty of the offense charged in the indictment.”
“Therefore, the Court finds the defendant guilty of the offense charged in the indictment.”
“judgment must be and will be entered in favor of the defendant Falstaff Brewing Corporation.”
“Accordingly, his petition for a writ of habeas corpus must be and it is denied.”
“Accordingly, his petition for a writ of habeas corpus must be and it is denied.”
“Accordingly, said order of the Commission is affirmed and judgment shall be entered in favor of the defendants.”
“Accordingly, an order will be entered granting his petition for a writ of habeas corpus and, since he is being illegally deprived of his liberty, discharging him immediately from the custody of the United States Navy and from the custody of the respondents.”
“Accordingly, said orders of the Commission must be and are affirmed and judgment will be entered in favor of the defendants.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No case-level electronic docket record survives in the reviewed archive for Day's tenure, so no caseload mix, duration, or motion-timing summary is available.
Put Judge Day's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Day actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Day's own signed orders and cites them.