Fred Clinton Jacobs
Judge Jacobs no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Jacobs decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Jacobs treated constitutional protections against unreasonable searches as controlling even when exclusion hindered narcotics enforcement.
“Regardless of how desirable or necessary it may be to suppress the traffic in narcotic drugs, yet well-founded principles of law cannot he ignored, nor constitutional guaranties disregarded to accomplish the purpose.”
Procedural preferences
He required proposed amendments to cure the identified legal defect rather than merely add facts that left the consideration inadequate.
“Inasmuch as the facts stated in the proposed amendment fail to show an adequate consideration for the 'agreement, the motion for leave to amend is denied.”
Cautions
In challenges to state regulation of interstate commerce, he looked for concrete operational burdens and did not require the regulated party to await enforcement before seeking preventive relief.
“One does not have to await the consummation of threatened injury to obtain preventive relief. If the injury is certainly impending that is enough.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The demurrer to the second and third counts is sustained, and the motion to dismiss each of these counts is granted. As a maximum penalty for a second offense of possession under the act, as charged in the first count, does not permit of infamous punishment, and the charge being sufficient in law, the demurrer to the first count is overruled, the motion to dismiss is denied, and the government may proceed with the prosecution of that charge by information.”
“The order of the referee is affirmed.”
“It appearing from the evidence to the satisfaction of this court that the ends of justice and the best interests of the public, as well as the defendant, will be subserved by admitting this defendant upon probation, the application is therefore granted.”
“The applications for temporary injunction and the motions to dismiss were heard at San Francisco, Cal., on September 30 and October 1, 1929, and the court at the conclusion of the argument, owing to the state of the pleadings, denied the motions for temporary injunction and took under advisement the motions to dismiss.”
“The motions to dismiss are therefore denied.”
“The case was properly removed to the federal court. Motion to remand is denied.”
“The bill fails to state a cause of action. Motion to dismiss is granted.”
“Inasmuch as the facts stated in the proposed amendment fail to show an adequate consideration for the 'agreement, the motion for leave to amend is denied.”
“There is no merit in the motion to dismiss and the same is denied.”
“As the whole ease is submitted to the eourt for final decision upon the agreed statement of facts, and from the facts and the law it appears that the eourt has jurisdiction and that a good cause in equity is stated, it follows that the complainant is entitled to the decree of this eourt permanently enjoining the enforcement of the order of the Corporation Commission, as prayed in the bill, with costs. It is so ordered.”
“An injunction will issue enjoining the occupation or use of said buildings and each of them for the period of one year from and after the date of the signing of the decree.”
“The injunction prayed for in the complaint is denied, and the defendants are awarded their costs.”
“the motion to substitute the defendant La Prade in the place and stead of Peterson is granted, upon condition that no costs that have accrued prior to nr after the substitution, may be assessed against him.”
“The motion of defendant La Prado to dismiss, as to him, is denied.”
“The defendant Peterson moved the court to dismiss the bills of complaint as to him, which motion is also denied.”
“the defendant’s exceptions to the master’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are overruled without costs, and the motion to suppress the master’s report denied.”
“That each of the plaintiffs are entitled to a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant Arthur T. La Prade, Attorney General of the state of Arizona, and all persons acting under his direction, and his successors, from enforcing or attempting to enforce, or from advising, instituting, prosecuting, or aiding in any action, suit, or proceeding of any kind or character to recover any penalty or damages for failure or refusal to observe or comply with the provisions of said law.”
“The motions'to dismiss were-denied.”
“It follows that the tax levies against complainant’s property for the years 1921 and 1922 are void, and that the defendants and each of them, their successors, agents, and employees, should be permanently enjoined from in any way or manner listing or entering upon the delinquent tax list or back tax books of the county of Yavapai, state of Arizona, any taxes collected upon or on account of said valuation made by said defendants and from in any way or manner attempting to enforce or collect said taxes against complainant or its property or from instituting or prosecuting or causing to be instituted or prosecuted any suit or proceeding whatever to enforce or collect the same.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No electronic case-level docket records were located for this historical tenure, so no caseload mix or duration claim is made.
A historical record
Judge Jacobs 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.