Harry Sandlin Mattice Jr.
How Judge Mattice rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Mattice no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Mattice decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Boles, Mattice denied a damages-limitation theory at summary judgment because the employer had not eliminated a factual dispute over whether the later-discovered misconduct would actually have caused termination.
“on the record before the Court on this motion, Polyloom has not carried its burden of establishing that there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether it would, in fact, have terminated Mr. Boles had it known of his prior conviction.”
Procedural preferences
In Person, Mattice required defendants seeking dismissal of newly added claims to address those claims in new motions.
“they must file new motions discussing those causes of action.”
Cautions
In Wilkerson, Mattice declined to compel criminal defendants to disclose in advance whether they would rely on advice of counsel.
“The Court finds no good cause to compel the Defendants to disclose whether or not they intend to rely on an advice of counsel defense.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant KLPI’s motion to dismiss will be DENIED.”
“Defendant PLS’s motion for judgment on the pleadings will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“Poly-loom’s Motion for Summary Judgment will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“Plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification of a collective action and for court approved notice to proposed class members will be GRANTED.”
“Defendant’s motion to strike will be DENIED.”
Mattice denied several dismissal grounds but reserved the personal-jurisdiction issue, leaving the motion partly unresolved.
“Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 35] is DENIED.”
“For the reasons stated below, the Court concludes that the bankruptcy court did not err and its rulings will be AFFIRMED.”
“Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 20] is GRANTED and Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants in the amount of $73,811.46.”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Court Doc. 7] is DENIED.”
“For the reasons stated below, the Court concludes that the bankruptcy court did not err and its ruling will be AFFIRMED.”
“Defendant Pinnacle Films, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Invalidity (Court Doc. 212) is DENIED;”
“Plaintiff Manuli Stretch USA, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Inequitable Conduct is DENIED (Court Doc. 219);”
“Counterclaim Defendants Quintec Films, Corporation’s, Terry Jones’, and Charles M. Leonard’s Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Pinnacle’s Counterclaim for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED (Court Doc. 209).”
“To the extent the Motions request that the Court transfer the action to the Western District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), they will be GRANTED.”
“The Government’s Motion to Consolidate (Doc. 44; Taylor, Doc. 4) is hereby GRANTED.”
“Chattanooga Publishing Company’s limited Motion to Intervene (Doc. 56; Taylor, Doc. 11) is hereby GRANTED.”
“The Government’s request to retain certain documents under seal (Docs. 58, 64; Taylor, Docs. 13, 17) is hereby DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“The Court hereby GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 24).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The five sampled terminated cases were filed in January 2006 and included land tort, insurance, negotiable-instrument, ERISA, and interstate-commerce matters.
A historical record
Judge Mattice 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.