Donald Stuart Russell

How Judge Russell rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina
Position
district
Status
Elevated to a higher court
Served
1966–1971
Appointed by
Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic)
Commissioned
1966-11-03
Education
University of South Carolina, A.B. (1925); University of South Carolina School of Law, LL.B. (1928)
Signed orders read
18

How Judge Russell decides

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

What persuades

A factual dispute defeated summary judgment when testimony could support the inference that the defendant knowingly procured an unfounded prosecution.

“These issues properly should await trial.”

Prompt action, a meritorious defense, and nonwillful counsel error favored relief from default.

“The philosophy of modern federal procedure favors trials on the merits”

Procedural preferences

Summary judgment was reserved for records without credibility disputes or facts capable of supporting the opposing claim.

“The power to grant a summary judgment is admittedly drastic and never proper where an issue turns on credibility”

Discovery requests were narrowed when incorporated definitions made document identification unduly burdensome and oppressive.

“would require the plaintiff meticulously to examine everything in its files. I regard this as unduly burdensome and oppressive.”

Cautions

Relief from judgment required particular facts identifying the claimed mistake rather than a general assertion of attorney error.

“The nature of the mistake itself must be stated”

A limited interpleader fund could not be used to force same-state tort claimants into federal litigation or prefer one claimant before allocation.

“to permit any one claimant to receive $10,000 from the fund at this stage could well give such claimant a preference from the fund.”

Signed rulings

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

Lee v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.
· 1967-12-27
Summary judgment (defendant telephone company) Granted in part

“I am, therefore, granting a partial summary judgment as to the plaintiff’s alleged cause of action for invasion of privacy but leaving open for trial his alleged cause of action for the wrongful disconnection”

Higgins v. Kenneth Moore & Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc.
· 1967-03-02
Summary judgment (corporate defendant) Granted

“The motion for summary judgment is accordingly granted”

Lankford v. Ryder Truck Systems, Inc.
· 1967-02-03
Motions to dismiss (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion to dismiss the third-party complaint is accordingly denied”

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Arnold
· 1967-12-02
Motions to strike (plaintiff insurer) Granted in part

“the second cause of action stated in the assured’s counterclaim is stricken. In addition, the plaintiff has sought to strike certain allegations in the assured’s first cause of action set forth in her counterclaim. So far as those parts of paragraphs 2, 5, 6 and 7 assailed by plaintiff’s motion, such motion is denied.”

Hipp v. Kennesaw Life & Accident Insurance Co.
· 1968-11-05
Motion for judgment as matter of law (defendant at close of plaintiff's evidence) Denied

“Both motions were overruled.”

Motion for judgment as matter of law (defendant at close of all evidence) Denied
Motion for judgment as matter of law (defendant after verdict) Granted

“Motion for judgment in favor of the defendant n.o.v. is hereby granted”

Harrison v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.
· 1967-02-02
Summary judgment (defendant creditor) Granted

“the motion of the Defendant for summary judgment is accordingly granted.”

Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance v. Greer
· 1968-09-04
Motion for advance from interpleader fund (insured defendants) Denied

“that $10,000 be advanced from the fund in the registry of the Court under an order entered in these proceedings for partial payment of the settlement of the claim of Eugene Malcolm Wright and his father herein is denied.”

Motions to dismiss (plaintiff and insured defendants) Granted

“The motion of the plaintiff and the defendants Michael D. Greer, by his Guardian ad Litem, Terrance Greer, Donald D. Greer and Terrance Greer, to dismiss the cross-complaints filed by the defendants Ira Thackston”

United States v. $3,216.59 in United States Currency
· 1967-02-03
Motion for relief from judgment (claimant Dewey E. Williams) Denied

“For the reasons given, the motion is denied”

Farrell v. Hollingsworth
· 1968-01-10
Motion to amend (plaintiff) Granted

“I am compelled, under the rule enumerated in Foman v. Davis (1962) 371 U.S. 178, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222, to grant the motion to amend.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“The motion for summary judgment is accordingly denied”

Rogers v. United States
· 1967-04-22
Summary judgment (United States) Granted

“The motion of the defendant for summary judgment will be granted”

Seaboard Air Line Railroad Co. v. Coastal Distributing Co.
· 1967-09-20
Motion for voluntary dismissal (plaintiff railroad) Granted

“the railroad answered that a settlement of Hill’s counterclaim had been reached and moved successfully to dismiss its own action against Hill.”

Motions to dismiss (Coastal Distributing Company) Granted

“The motion of Coastal for a dismissal of plaintiff’s action against it is accordingly granted.”

Flowers v. Zayre Corp.
· 1968-05-09
Motion to amend (defendant) Granted

“I do hereby authorize the amendment of the pleadings to conform to the proof”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Russell's reported District of South Carolina decisions include insurance, negligence, employment, civil rights, habeas, intellectual property, interpleader, and federal tort matters. The reviewed publications do not support a quantified caseload estimate.

A historical record

Judge Russell 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.