Oliver Perry Shiras
Judge Shiras no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Shiras decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Shiras allowed older transactions to be examined when they could reveal concealed assets or otherwise clarify a bankrupt's actual financial condition.
“The mere fact that the transaction inquired about happened more than four months before the initiation of the bankruptcy proceedings is no reason why it may not be inquired into or proven, provided it will aid in throwing light upon any issue or fact pertinent to the proceedings.”
He required clear evidence that a debtor still owned omitted property before treating the schedules as a false oath and denying discharge.
“in order to defeat the discharge, it must be clearly shown that, when the petition in bankruptcy was filed, the bankrupt, really owned the land or an interest therein”
Procedural preferences
A removal petition based on prejudice or local influence had to state the statutory ground directly, and supporting affidavits had to supply facts rather than conclusions.
“the affidavits submitted with the petition should state facts supporting the averments of the petition, and not merely the conclusion stated in the language of the statute”
Once removal for local prejudice had been adjudicated on a sufficient showing, he would not ordinarily reopen the issue through a competing set of affidavits.
“no good purpose can be subserved by permitting a war of affidavits to be entered upon, touching the existence or non-existence of local prejudice or influence.”
Cautions
Shiras denied bankruptcy discharge when asset transfers and the debtor's continuing interest showed that the sworn schedules were false.
“the failure to set it forth in the schedules, and in making oath that he had no property, is the making of a false oath of such a character as to defeat his right to a discharge”
He would not permit an inventor to prolong exclusivity through a later patent covering changes that ordinary skilled work would produce.
“It cannot be permitted to an inventor to secure a second and later patent upon a former invention by making such improvements thereon as the use of the original form would suggest to any skilled mechanic, and which did not require the exercise of invention.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“As I do not consider these propositions well taken, the demurrers to these indictments are overruled.”
“The motion to strike such exceptions from the files is therefore .granted.”
“following- the conclusions therein reached, the judgment in the trial court is affirmed.”
“In my judgment, this application should not be granted.”
“The exceptions to the rulings of the referee must therefore be sustained.”
“The discharge will therefore be granted, on usual terms.”
“the ruling of the referee that the claimant is not entitled to a landlord’s lien is affirmed.”
“The motion to dismiss the petition file in this case is therefore overruled.”
“viewing the papers in that light, the order of the referee is affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No case-level docket record assigned under Shiras's name was returned for his tenure. The profile therefore makes no claim about his complete caseload mix, case duration, administrative dispositions, or motion timing.
A historical record
Judge Shiras 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.