🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Harlan Hobart Grooms

United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama district Retired 1969 · served 1953–1969 Appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 20 signed orders read

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

How Judge Grooms decides

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

What persuades

Grooms enforced policy expiration according to the undisputed renewal record and did not extend protections written for mortgagees to an insured who let coverage lapse.

“The record clearly shows without dispute that James & Haekworth did not renew their policy.”

When no state appellate decision supplied the damages rule, he compared competing approaches and selected the measure tied to the amount of the undisclosed lien.

“A mortgagee’s recovery for a partial loss occasioned by an undisclosed prior lien is generally the amount of the lien.”

He distinguished contributory negligence from avoidable consequences and apportioned only the later, avoidable increment of damages.

“The Court attributes 55% of his total increased damages to his own conduct, and 45% to that of the defendant.”

Procedural preferences

For Social Security fees spanning court and agency work, Grooms required the agency to act first when it made the benefits award after remand.

“Where, as here, the award was not made by the Court, but by the Secretary after a remand on his motion, and it being mandatory on him to fix the fee, the Court is of the opinion that it should not rule upon the application for a fee until the Secretary has ruled.”

He evaluated removal separately for related plaintiffs and refused to aggregate damages where the governing claims allowed only compensatory recovery.

“Consequently, the damages claimed in the two counts cannot be aggregated in determining the jurisdictional amount involved in the case, since only compensatory damages can be recovered under each count”

When service was defective but another federal venue was available, Grooms transferred rather than dismissing the actions.

“The actions will not be dismissed, but will be transferred to the New Orleans Division of the Eastern District of Louisiana.”

Cautions

A party seeking to restrain federal tax collection had to show both that the government could not prevail under any circumstances and that extraordinary circumstances existed.

“the taxpayer has failed to show that under no circumstances could the Government ultimately prevail and that as a result of the imposition of the tax both special and extraordinary circumstances exist”

In shareholder litigation, he declined to apply attorney-client privilege against the shareholders where they alleged corporate wrongdoing injuring their interests.

“The Court is of the opinion that the privilege here claimed is not available as against plaintiff stockholders.”

Signed rulings

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

Denaburg v. Post Welding Supply Co., Inc.
· 1980-09-11
Motion to set aside preference (bankruptcy trustee) Granted

“A judgment will be entered directing that the transfer be set aside and vacated and that within ten days the defendant transfer the sum of $3,506.42 to the plaintiff as Trustee, in default of which a judgment will be entered against the defendant in that amount.”

Caldwell v. Califano
· 1978-08-14
Motion to reconsider (Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) Granted

“In view of the foregoing opinion, the motion to reconsider the judgment of July 10,1978, is due to be granted and the award vacated.”

Hensley v. Love
· 1969-03-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant Wilder) Denied

“The motion of defendant Wilder to dismiss is hereby denied.”

Motions to dismiss (other moving defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ motions to dismiss are each denied and said defendants will answer the complaint within twenty days.”

Morris Bean & Co. v. Reichhold Chemicals, Inc.
· 1971-03-25
Summary judgment (patent holder) Granted

“Defendant Reichhold Chemicals, Inc. is bound by the aforesaid judgment.”

James & Hackworth v. Continental Casualty Co.
· 1980-05-21
Summary judgment (insurer) Granted

“the court is of the opinion that the defendant’s motion for summary judgment should be granted, and that of the plaintiffs’ should be overruled.”

Summary judgment (judgment creditors) Denied
Garner v. Wolfinbarger
· 1968-02-21
Motions to compel (shareholder plaintiffs seeking documents) Granted

“Accordingly, the motions will be and each of the same is hereby granted.”

Motions to compel (shareholder plaintiffs seeking deposition answers) Granted
Hubert v. Federal Crop Insurance
· 1968-12-04
Insurance claim (farmers) Denied

“Plaintiffs are not entitled to a recovery herein.”

Bynum v. O'Donnell
· 1965-05-10
Motions to dismiss (federal tax officials) Granted

“the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, as this day amended, is due to be granted and the temporary restraining order dissolved”

Request for injunction (taxpayer) Denied
McKinney v. United States
· 1969-03-04
Summary judgment (United States) Granted

“The motion for summary judgment will be granted.”

Nelson v. GC Murphy Company
· 1965-09-24
Motions to remand (minor plaintiff in Case No. 65-575) Denied

“The Court is, therefore, of the opinion that the motion to remand should be overruled as to Case No. 65-575 and granted as to Case No. 65-576.”

Motions to remand (parent plaintiff in Case No. 65-576) Granted
FitzSimmons v. Jones Towing, Inc.
· 1965-02-02
Motion to quash service (defendant towing company) Granted

“The motions to quash are well taken.”

Katz v. Aspinwall
· 1971-09-01
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“The Court is of the opinion that the motions for summary judgment are due to be granted.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 451 days (N = 8).

The eight located assigned cases were filed from 1985 through 1987 and all terminated by 1988. Four were contract matters, two involved employee benefits, one involved maritime injury, and one involved wage law. This small archival slice does not establish Grooms's career caseload distribution.

A historical record

Judge Grooms 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.