George W. Cannon, Jr.
Judge Cannon no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Cannon decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a motion to compel international arbitration under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, the judge reads the 'null and void' exception narrowly and will not let a territorial regulatory-approval requirement defeat an otherwise valid arbitration clause.
“The Court finds that the approval or disapproval of an agreement to arbitrate by the Virgin Islands Commissioner of Insurance is not the type of defense that would render an arbitration clause null and void pursuant to the Convention.”
The judge treats a court's inherent authority to protect victims and witnesses as extending to a criminal defendant's own conduct during pretrial detention, regardless of whether he is held in local or federal custody, and will uphold a no-contact order against a jurisdictional challenge on that basis.
“The Court finds that the August 28th no-contact order and the September 24th interim order constrain Potter's conduct, but do not impose an order on the Bureau of Corrections ... the Court's jurisdiction to impose no-contact orders to protect the victims alleged in the criminal complaint stems from the 'indisputably... broad powers (of the trial judge) to ensure the orderly and expeditious progress of a trial.'”
Procedural preferences
Discovery motions to compel must be timely: the judge applies a firm rule that a motion to compel filed after the discovery deadline, without having pursued the remedy during the discovery period itself, will be denied as untimely regardless of the underlying merits.
“The Court finds that Plaintiff's motion to compel, filed almost four (4) months after the close of limited discovery, is untimely.”
Successive motions for reconsideration get short shrift: once an issue has been fully briefed and decided, the judge will not entertain a second bite at reconsideration and treats disagreement with the ruling, on its own, as no basis to revisit it.
“Dissatisfaction with the Court's ruling is not a proper basis for reconsideration ... the number of times a party may move to reconsider is limited.”
Cautions
A party who negotiates and agrees to a deposition date through counsel, then fails to appear without filing a motion to quash or for a protective order, will be sanctioned; a stated intent to withdraw as counsel or an informal notice of 'inability to attend' does not excuse the non-appearance.
“The Court refuses to condone such contumacious conduct. ... Plaintiff shall pay said Defendant's reasonable costs and attorney's fees related to and associated with the deposition and the motion at issue.”
In pretrial-detention decisions, the judge places heavy weight on a defendant's criminal record, the strength of the government's evidence, and whether the alleged offense occurred while the defendant was already on supervised release, and will not disturb a detention finding absent genuinely new evidence -- family third-party-custodian offers and a job offer were not enough.
“Said Defendant has produced no new evidence to cause the Court to reconsider its earlier finding ... that said Defendant's propensity for violence based upon the facts elicited during the detention hearing and upon his prior criminal record compels the conclusion that said Defendant poses a danger to the community.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff's Motion For Reconsideration (Docket No. 83) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant Jamal Misbeh to Respond to Discovery (Docket No. 120) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. ... DENIED AS MOOT with respect to the Interrogatories. ... GRANTED with respect to the Demand for Production of Documents.”
“Defendant Franklin Xavier's motion for reconsideration of the detention of said Defendant is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant to Supplement Responses to Discovery (Docket No. 30) is DENIED.”
“Defendant's, TMC, Motion For Sanctions Against Plaintiff Pursuant to Rule 37(d)(1)(A)(i); Plaintiff Failed to Attend Her Own Deposition (Docket No. 113) is GRANTED. ... Plaintiff shall pay said Defendant's reasonable costs and attorney's fees related to and associated with the deposition and the motion at issue.”
“the Court finds that the Government has made the requisite showing to support the Magistrate's finding that Defendants should be detained pending trial ... Accordingly, the Court will deny Defendants' appeals and affirm the March 1, 2013 Order of Detention.”
“the Court will adopt the Magistrate Judge's R&R, as modified herein ... Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is granted with regard to all of his claims brought against Defendants under Section 1983, Bivens, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.”
“the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's R&R and finds that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. No. 14) ... will be denied as moot.”
“Defendant's Motion to Amend September 24th Order (ECF No. 31) is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Vacate August 28th Order (ECF No. 33) is DENIED.”
“Luna Music's Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying as Moot Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Motion to Appoint Umpire (ECF No. 32) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Bluesource, LLC's, Motion to Compel Plaintiffs to Answer Written Discovery (ECF No. 183) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
A statutory pre-service screening of a pro se prisoner's civil-rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) and 1915A. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation to dismiss most claims (several with leave to amend) and let a handful proceed was substantially adopted, with the district judge separately dismissing one claim as time-barred and granting leave to amend the complaint by a set deadline.
“the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion to Remand, affirm Magistrate Judge Cannon's Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Defendant Underwriters' Motion to Compel Arbitration as modified by the analysis and reasons stated herein, and deny as moot Defendant Underwriters' Motion to Dismiss.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 45 days (N = 7).
The consent-jurisdiction civil docket sampled here (a commercial lease dispute, a federal mortgage foreclosure, and a quiet-title/tax dispute removed from territorial court) reflects the general civil caseload of the St. Croix magistrate's chambers -- contract, foreclosure, and property disputes referred or consented to him for full case management -- rather than a random cross-section of the whole district's docket.
A historical record
Judge Cannon 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.