David V. O'Brien
Judge O'Brien no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge O'Brien decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
O'Brien required concrete evidence of extreme and outrageous conduct before allowing an emotional-distress claim to reach a jury.
“The plaintiff must make a showing that defendant’s conduct was so outrageous that no reasonable person in a civilized society should be expected to endure it.”
O'Brien favored resolving a dismissal dispute on the merits where the nonmoving party's alleged misrepresentation contributed to the stipulation.
“The Third Circuit case law on Rule 60(b) is clear that any doubt should be resolved in favor of resolution of a case on the merits.”
Procedural preferences
O'Brien rejected relation back where the proposed defendant had no reason to anticipate suit before the limitations period expired.
“Gross could not have known that a suit would be filed against her since she was being represented by the same attorney as the plaintiff.”
O'Brien permitted targeted pre-suit discovery where an injured worker needed access to a nonparty site to identify responsible equipment manufacturers.
“In summary we will allow Lubrin to conduct an on-site investigation of the accident.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons stated herein, defendant Xerox’s Motion to Dismiss was granted on August 10,1983.”
“THAT the Daily News’ Motion for Summary Judgment be and the same hereby is GRANTED;”
“THAT defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction be and the same is hereby DENIED;”
“THAT defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress be and the same is hereby GRANTED;”
“THAT the motion for a directed verdict or for a new trial is DENIED.”
“THAT the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ in rem action against The Burkholder be, and the same, is hereby DENIED”
“THAT the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ in personam action against Richards and Paiewonsky be, and the same, is hereby GRANTED, and as to them, the complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Since the requirements of Fed.R. Civ.P. 15(c) have not been met, we must deny Cimini’s motion to amend his complaint.”
“Since Virgin Islands law prohibits an action against the named defendant, summary judgment will enter in favor of Belsky.”
“In summary we will allow Lubrin to conduct an on-site investigation of the accident.”
“Additionally, HOVIC must make an employee available for a rule 30(b)(6) deposition.”
“THAT the motion of the defendant be, and the same is hereby GRANTED”
“THAT the defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment be, and the same, is hereby GRANTED”
“THAT the defendants’ Cessna and Cifa motion to transfer this action to the District of Kansas is, hereby and the same, GRANTED.”
“THAT plaintiff’s motion for a writ of prejudgment attachment is DENIED.”
“THAT plaintiff Carib’s motion for an award of prejudgment interest is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No exact-name assigned electronic docket was located from O'Brien's historical tenure, so no caseload mix, duration, motion-outcome, or timing claim is available.
A historical record
Judge O'Brien 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.