William F. Downes
Judge Downes no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Downes decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He applied enacted state policy even while expressing concern about its breadth.
“A court should not decimate the purpose of a legislative act, no matter how distasteful, when that purpose is clearly incorporated in the language of the act.”
He required environmental agencies to address cumulative impacts and realistic mitigation rather than accepting unsupported conclusions.
“This Court will not rubberstamp an agency determination that fails to consider cumulative impacts, fails to realistically assess impacts to ranchlands, and relies on unsupported, unmonitored mitigation measures.”
He required an unequivocal statutory waiver before allowing claims against the United States.
“waiver cannot be implied, but must be unequivocally expressed.”
Procedural preferences
On dismissal, he accepted well-pleaded allegations and asked whether any provable facts could support relief.
“Such a motion should not be granted unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.”
He treated pleading sufficiency as distinct from weighing evidence that might later be presented.
“this Court’s ‘function on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is not to weigh potential evidence that the parties might present at trial, but to assess whether the plaintiffs complaint alone is legally sufficient to state a claim for which relief may be granted.’”
He applied the more specific automobile-negligence statute over a general comparative-negligence provision.
“the specific language of § 1402(f) governing negligence claims arising from automobile accidents controls over the general language of § 1-1-109 applicable to all negligence actions.”
Cautions
He enforced the Fourth Amendment despite the defendant's criminal conduct and the officer's good intentions.
“if judges, in order to avoid results such as this, equivocate in its enforcement, the rights of all citizens are thereby denigrated.”
In attorney discipline, he centered the risk that continued practice posed to the public.
“allowing her to continue to practice presents a grave risk to the public.”
He found that an industrial workplace did not excuse severe alleged harassment.
“No person, regardless of whether he works in an office building or in an industrial fabrication shop should be subjected to the kind of behavior Mr. Sisco attributes to Mr. An-dress.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDERED that Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs Claims with Prejudice are hereby granted.”
“ORDERED that Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED.”
“ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence is hereby GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that Defendants’ Final Rules establishing a nonessential experimental population of gray wolves in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, central Idaho and southwestern Montana are hereby found unlawful and set aside pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 706; it is further,”
“ORDERED that the Secretary’s decision to adopt the Final Climbing Management Plan is a lawful and legitimate exercise of his authority and is affirmed.”
“ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that this matter is REMANDED to the Corps for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“ORDERED that Defendants’ Ron Thomas and Gerald Goulding’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, Defendant Fred Bass’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs’ Motions for Summary Judgment, filed June 25, 2004, are DISMISSED as moot. Plaintiffs’ Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion in Limine is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that evidence on the issue of whether Plaintiffs decedent was wearing her seat belt at the time of the collision is INADMISSIBLE at trial. It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Certify is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that the Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“ORDERED that the Defendants’ Joint Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Wyoming State-Law Claims (Docket #80) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ First, Second, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Claims for Relief are DISMISSED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 1.5 days (N = 6).
The recent located records include miscellaneous enforcement matters, personal injury, employment discrimination, product liability, fraud, forfeiture, trademark, habeas, and prisoner civil-rights cases. This small recent slice does not describe the judge's full career caseload.
A historical record
Judge Downes 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.