John A. Field Jr.

How Judge Field rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Position
district
Status
Deceased
Served
1959–1995
Appointed by
Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican)
Commissioned
1959-08-13
Education
Hampden-Sydney College, A.B., 1932; University of Virginia School of Law, LL.B., 1935
Signed orders read
19

How Judge Field decides

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

What persuades

In Woodrum, Field relaxed administrative claim preclusion where the agency's own record showed a profound limitation that made rigid finality unjust.

“the Secretary’s decision was unquestionably founded upon error manifest on the face of the record”

In Nationwide Bowling, Field treated three instruments as a single contract because their relationship and incorporation were clear.

“it is not necessary that a written agreement constituting a single contract shall be encompassed in one instrument.”

Procedural preferences

In Leas, Field required the refund filing to state the amount, substantial grounds, and general supporting facts before litigation.

“it must have indicated not only the amount claimed but the substantial grounds on which illegality is asserted and the general facts supporting the grounds, so that they may be fully investigated.”

In Lucas, Field treated supported administrative factfinding as controlling even when another conclusion might also be possible.

“it is not the function of a reviewing court to weigh the evidence or resolve conflicts in it, even when it is possible to draw a conclusion different from that of the Secretary.”

Cautions

In Salvatore, Field required an employee to use the exclusive grievance and arbitration process before seeking judicial relief under a collective agreement.

“plaintiff must resort to those contractual procedures instead of seeking initial redress in the courts.”

In Jardine, Field treated a longstanding family home and continuing intent to return as outweighing periods of out-of-state work lodging.

“A change in residence for the purpose of seeking employment or for convenience in working conditions does not, without more, indicate a change in domicile.”

Signed rulings

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

Abrams v. United States
69-29; 69-30 · 1971-05-21
Motion to vacate third party complaint (third-party defendant Julyn Sportswear, Inc.) Denied

“the motion of Julyn Sportswear, Inc., to vacate the third-party complaint be and the same is hereby denied.”

Hunt v. Board of Education of County of Kanawha
70-225 · 1971-01-18
Motion for summary judgment or to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“the motions of the defendants for summary judgment and dismissal be and the same are hereby granted and the complaint herein dismissed.”

United States v. Higgins
536 · 1966-11-03
Petition to enforce internal revenue summons (United States) Denied

“the papers sought under the summons in this proceeding are properly privileged and that respondent was within his rights in refusing to produce them pursuant to the statutory summons.”

Criddle v. Richardson
69-24 BK · 1971-01-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion to dismiss will be granted.”

Woodrum v. Richardson
70-112 · 1971-01-18
Motions to dismiss (defendant Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) Denied

“the defendant’s motion to dismiss will be denied’ and an order granting plaintiff a period of disability and disability insurance benefits will be entered.”

Hoke v. United States
2539 · 1967-09-12
Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiffs) Denied

“the motions for partial summary judgment of the plaintiffs should be denied”

Motion for partial summary judgment (United States) Granted

“the cross motions for summary judgment of the Government should be granted.”

Nationwide Bowling Corp. v. Brunswick Corp.
3128 · 1968-03-01
Summary judgment (defendant Brunswick Corp.) Granted

“The defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be granted”

Lucas v. Finch
3728 · 1970-06-12
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiff’s motion to remand will be and hereby is denied.”

Summary judgment (defendant Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) Granted

“the defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted and the Secretary’s decision is affirmed.”

In re Neil
429–431 · 1962-10-02
Petition to enforce internal revenue summons (Internal Revenue Service in proceeding 429) Granted in part

“counsel may prepare an order requiring the respondents to appear before the Special Agent of the Internal Revenue Service in response to the summonses at such time and place as he may designate within the next thirty (30) days, subject to the following provisions”

Petition to enforce internal revenue summons (Internal Revenue Service in proceeding 430) Granted in part
Petition to enforce internal revenue summons (Internal Revenue Service in proceeding 431) Granted in part
Morris v. Finch
572 · 1969-12-31
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“the order denying this motion will stand”

Summary judgment (defendant Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) Granted

“defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be, and hereby is, granted.”

Carter v. Finch
431 · 1969-02-06
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied”

Summary judgment (defendant Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) Granted

“the Secretary’s motion for summary judgment is granted, and his decision is affirmed.”

Leas v. United States
2899 · 1965-11-05
Motions to dismiss (United States) Granted

“The motion to dismiss will be granted”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The five earliest located matters had no subject classification or reliable disposition metadata, so no caseload mix is reported.

A historical record

Judge Field 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.