William Wayne Justice

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas district Retired 2009 · served 1968–2009 Appointed by Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic) 18 signed orders read

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

How Judge Justice decides

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

What persuades

He treated timely efforts to commence a case as significant when a litigant promptly cured a filing-fee issue and completed service within the rule's deadline.

“There is no evidence in this case, however, that Lowery acted in bad faith or unreasonably delayed in paying her fee.”

He distinguished statutory civil-rights claims from contract grievances and did not treat a collective-bargaining agreement as an automatic waiver of a federal forum.

“an employee such as Bush is not barred by a CBA from bringing a Title VII claim in federal court.”

He denied summary judgment when disputed medical causation and professional duties could affect both liability and qualified immunity.

“genuine issues of material fact remain with respect to underlying liability and entitlement to qualified immunity”

He enforced statutory trial deadlines and rejected ordinary docket congestion as justification for delay.

“Docket congestion is not ‘good cause’ for delay under the IAD.”

Cautions

At the pleading stage, he separated legal sufficiency from proof and declined to weigh factual support on a dismissal motion.

“at issue in a motion to dismiss is the legal sufficiency, not the factual sufficiency, of a party’s case.”

He required a federal pleading to identify an independent jurisdictional basis for common-law claims after the federal statutory theory failed.

“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires a pleading to contain ‘a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court’s jurisdiction depends.’”

Signed rulings

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

Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Penny
· 1994-07-15
Motion for jury trial (defendant) Denied

“defendant’s motion for a jury trial in the above-entitled and numbered civil action shall be, and it is hereby, DENIED.”

Yeager v. TRW, Inc.
· 1997-01-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment shall be, and is hereby, GRANTED with respect to plaintiffs claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.”

Clark v. Sanders (In re Reserve Production, Inc.)
· 1995-10-03
Motion for reconsideration (defendant) Denied

“the defendant’s motion to reconsider shall be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Motion for leave to appeal (defendant) Granted

“the defendant’s motion for leave to appeal shall be, and is hereby, GRANTED.”

Perkins v. Gregg County, Texas
· 1995-06-27
Motion for protective order (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiffs motion for protective order is GRANTED.”

Cockrum v. Johnson
· 1996-02-12
Motion for protective order (applicant) Granted in part

“the motion for a protective order, should be, and is hereby, GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”

Lowery v. Carrier Corp.
· 1997-02-11
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the defendant’s motion to dismiss shall be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Bush v. Carrier Air Conditioning
· 1996-09-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“the defendant’s motion for summary judgment shall be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Roberts v. United States Postmaster General
· 1996-12-03
Motion for partial dismissal and summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“the defendant’s motion for par7 tial dismissal and summary judgment shall be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Crump v. Gilmer Independent School District
· 1992-05-29
Motion for temporary restraining order (plaintiffs) Granted in part

“the requested relief will be granted as to plaintiffs Crump and Jeffrey, and denied as to plaintiff Finch.”

Gilbert v. Texas Mental Health & Mental Retardation
· 1996-03-12
Summary judgment (defendant Upton) Denied

“Upton’s motion for summary judgment shall be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Summary judgment (remaining defendants) Denied

“the remaining defendants’ motion for summary judgment shall be, and is hereby, DENIED.”

Wilkerson v. United States
· 1993-08-30
Motions to dismiss (United States) Granted in part

“the United States’ motion to dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part.”

Gaitan-Campanioni v. Thornburgh
· 1991-11-07
Motion for discovery (applicants) Granted

“The applicants’ motion for discovery therefore shall be granted in a separate order issued concurrently herewith.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 209 days (N = 20).

The January 1990 enumeration contains twenty terminated cases and is a narrow archival slice, not a career-wide caseload measure.

A historical record

Judge Justice 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.