Dee Vance Benson
Judge Benson no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Benson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Challenges to arbitration awards required evidence of serious process misconduct; an asserted legal error by the arbitrators was not enough.
“Absent that kind of abuse of the system, the parties are not entitled to legal review by this or any other court, no matter how much they may feel the umpire got the law wrong.”
When a criminal statute remained genuinely ambiguous after conventional interpretation, he applied the rule of lenity in the accused's favor.
“And when this is the case, our tradition of fair play and justice has always favored the interpretation in favor of the accused.”
A summary-judgment movant did not prevail where the record left a genuine factual dispute about whether asserted trade dress was functional.
“The Court, however, finds there exist genuine issues of material fact regarding the trade dress issue.”
Procedural preferences
Repeated refusal to obey discovery orders and prosecute the case supported dismissal with prejudice.
“Plaintiff has refused to comply with the Court’s orders compelling discovery and willfully refused to cooperate in the discovery process and the prosecution of this case.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to suppress is DENIED.”
“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is accordingly GRANTED.”
Benson concurred separately in the three-judge panel decision and emphasized the distributional distortion that would result from counting one private overseas group while excluding comparable groups. "Accordingly, inclusion of a single group which so clearly and dramatically distorts distributive accuracy, to the benefit of one state, is impermissible."
“For the reasons stated above, the court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the cross-motions for summary judgment.”
“For the reasons stated above, Mr. Eaton’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted in part and denied in part.”
“Mr. Goulding and Washington County School District’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED in whole.”
The signed order announced that the court would continue applying the federal sentencing guidelines while also stating an alternative sentence as a precaution. "This Court, then, will continue to recognize the Federal Sentencing Guidelines as valid law, and will apply them at all future sentencings unless and until the precedents binding on the Court require otherwise."
“the court hereby DENIES Defendants’ Motion in its entirety.”
“PETPO’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, with prejudice.”
“Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, with prejudice.”
“For these reasons, the Court DENIES Barrick’s motion for summary judgment and GRANTS the United States’ motion for summary judgment.”
“Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment is therefore DENIED.”
“Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion.”
“Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to dismiss Count 31 of the Indictment is GRANTED.”
“the Court DENIES his Motion to Vacate.”
“The Court GRANTS Mr. Mulligan’s Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award in part and confirms the award. Otherwise, Mr. Mulligan’s Motion is DENIED.”
“The Court GRANTS Mr. Abbott’s Motion for Protective Order.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 304 days (N = 20).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 30 days (N = 9).
The bounded enumeration contains 20 terminated cases filed in January and February 2009. It is a historical slice, not a career-wide caseload profile.
A historical record
Judge Benson 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.