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

John Helm Pratt

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia district Deceased · served 1968–1989 Appointed by Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic) 24 signed orders read

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

How Judge Pratt decides

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

What persuades

He declined to extend a binding military-immunity doctrine beyond the interests it was designed to protect.

“We, while recognizing its validity, are under no obligation to stretch its application.”

He deferred to a reasonable agency construction where Congress had left the statutory policy unresolved.

“Until Congress addresses this matter, the Court will defer to the agency’s interpretation of the statute at issue.”

Cautions

He would not require manufacturers to add warnings explaining the consequences of ignoring clear existing safety warnings.

“It would be patently unfair to require the manufacturer to equip every machine with a warning of what the consequences will be if warnings already in place are not followed.”

He was unwilling to second-guess presidential judgment in an important national-security setting.

“we are unwilling to second-guess the judgment of the President in the important area of national security.”

Signed rulings

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

1992 Republican Senate-House Dinner Committee v. Carolina's Pride Seafood, Inc.
· 1994-11-08
Motion to vacate (plaintiff) Granted

“ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to vacate the Court’s July 28, 1994 opinion and order is granted; and it is”

Limo v. United States
· 1994-05-27
Summary judgment (Paul Pevsner) Denied

“ORDERED that defendant Pevsner’s motion for summary judgment is denied.”

Savada v. United States Department of Defense
· 1990-11-14
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that both parties’ motions for summary judgment are denied without prejudice; and it is”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied
Orchestra, Inc. v. United States Postal Service
· 1989-07-18
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“ORDERED that defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted and this action shall stand dismissed.”

American Postal Workers Union v. United States Postal Service
· 1993-08-23
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted; and it is”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is denied; and it is”

Johnson v. United States
· 1993-01-11
Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“For the reasons given below, we grant plaintiff's motion and deny defendant’s motions.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied
Rowell v. Sullivan
· 1993-02-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that summary judgment is granted for the defendant; and it is”

Nevas v. Department of Justice
· 1992-04-29
Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Granted

“For the reasons stated below, we will grant plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and deny defendant's motion for summary judgment.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied
Nofziger Communications, Inc. v. Birks
· 1991-10-07
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied, and defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Baldwin v. Harris Corp.
· 1990-10-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant’s renewed motion for summary judgment is granted.”

Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co. v. Burford
· 1989-09-19
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“ORDERED that the defendants’ motions to dismiss as to all parties are granted because of lack of jurisdiction.”

Hospital de Area de Carolina v. Sullivan
· 1990-04-09
Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Denied

“ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is denied without prejudice; it is”

Motions to remand (defendants) Granted in part

“ORDERED that the defendants’ motion to remand is granted in part and denied in part; and it is”

A historical record

Judge Pratt 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.