William E. Duffin
How Judge Duffin decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In diversity cases, Duffin makes a careful Erie prediction and may decline to recognize a defense that Wisconsin courts have never adopted when it conflicts with settled state doctrine. In this products-liability case, he refused to import the contract-specification defense into Wisconsin law.
“Given the Wisconsin Supreme Court's articulation of Wisconsin common law in Fuchsgruber and the recent codification of product liability law reaffirming Wisconsin's commitment to the principles of strict liability, the court concludes that, if presented with the question ... the Wisconsin Supreme Court would hold that it does not.”
A party relying on an implied software license must establish its scope; evidence that some use was permitted does not establish that every later use was authorized.
“Thus, a factual dispute exists as to the scope of any implied license given to CompuClaim for the use of the CMWebSite source code, precluding the court from granting summary judgment in CompuClaim's favor with respect to this affirmative defense or in Empire's favor with respect to its copyright infringement claim.”
Procedural preferences
Duffin enforces Rule 9(b) particularity in False Claims Act cases: describing a detailed scheme is not enough without a representative example connecting a specific violation to a government-paid claim. In this case, he dismissed without prejudice and allowed amendment.
“the allegations contained in Count One of the amended complaint fall short of the particularity required by Rule 9(b). ... In the interest of justice, Kroening should be permitted to amend his complaint.”
For disability claims seeking damages, failure to provide the requested accommodation is not enough by itself; the record must support deliberate indifference by an official able to address the alleged discrimination.
“The fact that Children's Hospital did not provide Juech with an in-person interpreter when she requested one does not, without more, suggest deliberate indifference.”
Cautions
Duffin expects arguments in the body of a brief rather than in footnotes, and has expressly described a footnote as an inappropriate way to present an argument.
“noting in a footnote (never an appropriate means for presenting an argument, see Procedures for Litigants Appearing Before Magistrate Judge William E. Duffin, para. 3.B. ...)”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to the findings in this Decision and Order, Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration as against Plaintiff Williams is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration as against Plaintiff Walker is denied.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is denied.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Stay Plaintiff Walker's proceedings is denied.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion of Forest Laboratories, Inc. and Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to dismiss the first amended complaint (ECF No. 50) is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that relator Kurt Kroening may file a second amended complaint not later than February 5, 2016.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Symmetry's motion for summary judgment with respect to the plaintiffs' 'breach of express warranty' ... claims is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Symmetry's motion for summary judgment with respect to the plaintiffs' manufacturing defect claims (both in negligence and strict liability) is denied without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Symmetry's motion for summary judgment with respect to the plaintiffs' claim of negligent design is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Symmetry's motion for summary judgment is denied in all other respects.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the parties' stipulated motion to dismiss CompuClaim's counterclaims (ECF No. 214) is granted. Accordingly, Empire's motion for summary judgment with respect to CompuClaim's counterclaims is moot.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Empire's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 162) is granted in part and denied in part. It is granted as unopposed with respect to the duration of the License Agreement. Addendum B extended the original term of three years to a term of five years. It is denied as to all of Empire's other claims against CompuClaim.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CompuClaim's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 165) is denied.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by Children's Hospital and Health System, Inc. and Children's Hospital of Wisconsin is granted with respect to Claims 1 (Americans with Disabilities Act), 2 (Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act), and 4 (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) of Alissa Juech's amended complaint. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's motions in limine (ECF Nos. 34, 35) are dismissed as moot.”
“The United States' motion to strike will be granted.”
“Finally, Burns's ‘Motion for Settlement & Release of Interest’ (ECF No. 16) is denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No court-wide grant rate is asserted. Duffin's assigned docket includes many criminal warrant and seizure matters alongside consent civil cases, so the available sample does not support a general merits tendency.
Put Judge Duffin's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Duffin actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Duffin's own signed orders and cites them.