Howard Francis Corcoran
Judge Corcoran no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Corcoran decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In diversity litigation, he followed the controlling local appellate court’s clear rejection of an older federal doctrine.
“Since the jurisdiction of this Court is based on diversity, we are bound by the Coleman decision.”
He distinguished protected national-security substance from basic metadata that could be disclosed without revealing intelligence methods or activities.
“We fail to see how the revelation of this information could result in disclosing intelligence methods or sources of NSA functions and activities.”
Cautions
He would not impose supervisory constitutional liability without a policy-based theory tied to the alleged wrong.
“We find the reasoning of these courts persuasive and hold that recovery may not be had against the District of Columbia in a Bivens action on a respondeat superior theory.”
He treated a completed grievance process as the trigger for a short limitations period and enforced that deadline.
“Plaintiff received notice of the final action on his grievance on November 16, 1980. He did not file this action until May 6, 1982, well after the statute of limitations had run.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDERED that the motion of the defendant for summary judgment is hereby GRANTED, and that judgment be entered in favor of the defendant.”
“ORDERED, that within ten (10) days of the date of this Order, the plaintiff Nellie Sklagen shall provide defendant’s counsel with medical authorizations in accordance with the form tendered with defendant’s motion to compel discovery”
“ORDERED this 17th day of February, 1982 that the defendant’s motion to file a third party complaint is hereby denied.”
“ORDERED that the motion of the defendants to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is hereby DENIED;”
“FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of defendant District of Columbia and defendant Barry to dismiss is hereby GRANTED and the action is dismissed as to them.”
“ORDERED that this action be remanded to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia;”
“ordered, adjudged and decreed that the motion of the intervenor-garnishee to quash the attachment be, and the same is hereby, granted;”
“ordered, adjudged and decreed that plaintiff’s motions for a judgment of condemnation be, and the same are hereby, denied;”
“ordered, adjudged and decreed that defendant’s motion to ‘correct heading’ of defendant’s motion to quash be, and the same is hereby, granted;”
“ordered, adjudged and decreed that the supersedeas bond filed herein on April 21, 1975, be, and the same is hereby, expressly approved.”
“In light of the above, plaintiff’s request for taxation of costs against defendant is granted in part and denied in part.”
“Ordered, adjudged and decreed that petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus be, and the same is hereby granted;”
“Accordingly, defendant Bechtel’s motion to dismiss the complaint should be and the same hereby is granted.”
“ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss is hereby GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that the motion of defendants Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation, D. C., and Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. for summary judgment is hereby GRANTED, and that judgment be entered in favor of them in this action.”
“The Court granted plaintiffs motion to amend the complaint to add WMATA as a defendant on May 17, 1982, the first day of the hearing on this motion.”
“ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary judgment be, and the same is hereby, granted.”
A historical record
Judge Corcoran 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.