Frank Wiley Wilson

How Judge Wilson rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Wilson 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 Tennessee
Position
district
Status
Deceased
Served
1961–1982
Appointed by
John F. Kennedy (Democratic)
Commissioned
1961-06-15
Education
University of Tennessee, A.B. (1939); University of Tennessee College of Law, J.D. (1941)
Signed orders read
20

How Judge Wilson decides

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

What persuades

Wilson avoided resolving insurer obligations when the underlying state-court liability and theory remained unsettled, treating a declaratory ruling at that stage as advisory.

“Prior to an adjudication of liability in the state court action and prior to an adjudication of the grounds upon which such liability is to be imposed, any adjudication by this Court in this case would at best be highly speculative and theoretical.”

Procedural preferences

Wilson would not defeat trade-secret protection by deciding the merits during discovery unless the issue could properly be resolved under the summary-judgment standard.

“unless this issue could properly be decided upon a motion for summary judgment, it would be improper for the Court to deny a protective order on the basis of the lack of merit of the plaintiff’s contentions with regard to trade secrets.”

Cautions

Wilson required parties challenging agency action to complete the prescribed administrative process before seeking judicial relief.

“No one is entitled to judicial relief for a supposed or threatened injury until the prescribed administrative remedy has been exhausted.”

Signed rulings

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

Robinson v. Celebrezze
· 1964-04-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“It is, therefore, ordered that the defendant’s motion to dismiss filed in this cause be granted and that the cause be and hereby is dismissed.”

Reed v. Califano
· 1980-06-02
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Accordingly, an order will enter denying the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and motion for judgment on the pleadings and granting the defendant’s motion which the Court will treat as a motion for judgment on the pleadings.”

Judgment on the pleadings (plaintiff) Denied
Judgment on the pleadings (defendant) Granted
Desrosiers v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
· 1980-04-02
Motion to intervene (intervenor) Granted

“Turning first to the motion of the TVA to be permitted to intervene as a party defendant in the lawsuit, the motion will be allowed.”

Sua sponte dismissal (court) Granted

“Based upon the foregoing discussion, the Court is of the opinion that it lacks jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s complaint will be dismissed.”

American Consumers, Inc. v. Kroger Co.
· 1976-08-02
Lanham act claim (plaintiff) Denied

“It is accordingly the opinion of the Court that the complaint in this case fails to allege and the evidence in the case fails to establish any violation of the Lanham Act and that no federal question jurisdiction would accordingly lie.”

Chappell v. Olin-Mathieson Chemical Corp.
· 1969-03-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, the Court is of the opinion that the motion for summary judgment in behalf of the defendant, Olin-Mathieson Chemical Corporation, should be overruled.”

New Grant-Patten Milk Co. v. Happy Valley Farms, Inc.
· 1963-09-28
Motion for partial summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The motion of Seal-test for a partial summary judgment upon the issue of any violation by it of Section 7 of the Clayton Act should therefore be sustained under the undisputed facts of this case.”

Aetna Insurance v. Transamerica Insurance
· 1967-01-19
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The defendant’s motion for summary judgment will accordingly be sustained.”

Motion to compel production (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Action upon all remaining motions are thereby rendered moot and an order will enter dismissing this lawsuit.”

Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Moot / procedural
Objection to requests for admission (defendant) Moot / procedural
Motion to intervene (intervenor) Moot / procedural
Goldberg v. Faull
· 1967-11-03
Judgment on the pleadings (third_party_defendant) Granted

“However, the Court is of the opinion that the third-party defendant is entitled to judgment in his favor upon the pleadings, and an order will enter accordingly.”

Textured Yarn Co. v. Burkart-Schier Chemical Co.
· 1966-07-20
Motion for protective order (plaintiff) Granted

“The Court is of the opinion that a protective order should be granted.”

Watson v. Celebrezze
· 1965-08-25
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Having concluded that this Court is without jurisdiction to review the subject matter of the petition herein, the motion of the defendant to dismiss this action will be sustained.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“It will therefore be unnecessary to consider further the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.”

Carvin Ex Rel. Thompson v. Standard Accident Insurance
· 1966-04-28
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“It appearing to the Court that this case has been properly removed here, plaintiff’s motion to remand is denied.”

Morrison v. United States
· 1964-04-17
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“The motion for summary judgment on behalf of the taxpayer will be sustained and the countermotion for summary judgment on behalf of the government will be overruled.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

No case-level docket sample is available for Wilson's tenure, so the profile makes no complete claim about caseload mix, duration, or motion timing.

A historical record

Judge Wilson 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.