Donald James Porter

United States District Court for the District of South Dakota district Retired 2003 · served 1979–2003 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 26 signed orders read

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

How Judge Porter decides

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

What persuades

Porter required the agency to carry its burden with evidence that the claimant could perform work available in the economy.

“The medical evidence should have been evaluated in light of the Secretary’s burden of showing that Roberts could perform work in the national economy.”

He treated the intentional implantation of a medical device as the key fact supporting a continuing-tort theory.

“The act of implanting the drains by the defendants was intentional and deliberate.”

Procedural preferences

A missing administrative-hearing recording required remand because the district court could review only the agency record.

“A district court faced with the Secretary’s statement that he has lost the tape of a plaintiff’s administrative hearing has little choice but to remand the case to the Secretary.”

Administrative exhaustion required sufficient notice for investigation, not a fully drafted future complaint.

“Defendant’s interpretation of § 2675(a) and the regulations would result in an unjustified elevation of form over substance.”

Cautions

Delay in seeking to withdraw a guilty plea counted against finding a fair and just reason for withdrawal.

“the five weeks delay between defendant’s plea and his decision to withdraw his plea weigh against allowing defendant to withdraw his plea.”

He considered whether denying costs would deter future public-interest environmental challenges.

“will denial of costs unduly inhibit future challenges to environmental decisions, thus reducing the effect of substantive environmental protections?”

Signed rulings

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

Engelhart v. Schweiker
558 F. Supp. 112 · 1983-03-03
Social security appeal (plaintiff claimant) Granted

“Plaintiff’s case is remanded to the Secretary for a de novo hearing before an administrative law judge different from the ALJ who presided over plaintiff’s original hearing.”

Stucker v. Schweiker
547 F. Supp. 316 · 1982-06-03
Social security appeal (plaintiff claimant) Granted

“The decision of the Secretary will accordingly be vacated, and the cause remanded to the Secretary of Health and Human Services for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.”

Blume v. United States
40 B.R. 551 · 1984-06-29
Bankruptcy appeal (federal agency and bank appellants) Denied

“For the reasons given, this Court affirms the judgment of the Bankruptcy Court setting aside the Spink County Circuit Court mortgage foreclosure judgment.”

Roubideaux v. Cox
601 F. Supp. 174 · 1985-01-22
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted

“For all the reasons given, therefore, the court awards plaintiff the total sum of $2,995.35 for her fees and expenses in this action.”

Johnson v. Busby
520 F. Supp. 751 · 1981-08-04

The court sustained federal-officer removal after determining that the complaint arose from official duties: “It is therefore ordered that this case be brought on for trial at Aberdeen, South Dakota, on Aug. 14, 1981.”

In re Chamberlain Livestock Auction, Inc.
22 B.R. 750 · 1982-09-02
Motion to vacate (plaintiffs) Denied

“The Court therefore denies Plaintiff’s motion to vacate its order of August 20, 1982; the action is dismissed for want of subject matter jurisdiction.”

United States v. Morrison
770 F. Supp. 526 · 1991-07-02
Motion to withdraw guilty plea (defendant) Denied

“ORDERED that defendant’s motion is denied.”

Southeastern Human Development Corp. v. Heckler
560 F. Supp. 925 · 1983-04-21
Motion for contempt (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion for an order of contempt will be denied.”

United States v. Provost
777 F. Supp. 774 · 1991-10-24
Motion for new trial (defendant) Denied

“Having failed to proceed with diligence, the defendant’s motion for new trial must be denied.”

Grooms v. Solem
520 F. Supp. 1184 · 1981-09-02
Habeas petition (petitioner) Granted

“The Court therefore orders that a writ of habeas corpus be issued commanding the release of petitioner.”

United States v. Nehl
599 F. Supp. 324 · 1984-12-18
Civil claim (United States) Denied

“Plaintiff’s action being barred by the statute of limitations at 28 U.S.C. § 2415(a), judgment must therefore be entered for defendant.”

Walker v. Wegner
535 F. Supp. 415 · 1982-01-11
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiffs) Granted in part

“But these factors do not, when considered in light of the discussion above, lead this Court to the conclusion that plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees should be granted in full.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The publication-selected decisions do not establish the distribution of Porter’s full caseload.

A historical record

Judge Porter 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.