Frank Harlan Freedman
Judge Freedman no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Freedman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Freedman treated clear physical measures excluding the public as strong evidence of a protected expectation of privacy.
“Short of posting guards, it is hard to see how the defendant could have given any clearer statement of its intent to exclude others from the premises.”
Freedman balanced confidentiality against the requesting party’s need for central evidence rather than treating commercial secrecy as an absolute discovery bar.
“What is essentially involved is a balancing between the plaintiff’s need for disclosure and the defendants’ need for protection.”
Procedural preferences
Freedman rejected class treatment when varied claims and defenses would turn the proceeding into numerous individualized trials.
“A class action would almost certainly become a ‘series of mini-trials’ due to the various legal claims and separate defenses.”
Freedman required litigants to follow the administrative review route Congress specified before seeking judicial intervention.
“compliance with procedure is not at the discretion Of the plaintiff, especially where the procedure is explicitly created by statute.”
Cautions
Freedman applied filing and service requirements even when their operation produced a severe result for a self-represented litigant.
“The result in this case is harsh.”
Freedman regarded an injunction halting related customer suits as extraordinary when venue rights and judicial economy did not require it.
“The Court deems the relief defendant seeks to be extraordinary and intrusive.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The motion of defendants Joseph Noone and Marion Noone to dismiss for lack of speedy trial is DENIED.”
“The motion of defendant Peter Noone to dismiss is DENIED.”
“The motion of defendant Kevin Noone for a judgment of acquittal is DENIED.”
“The government’s motion to revoke the conditions of Joseph Noone’s release is STAYED.”
“defendants Boy Scouts of America and Pioneer Valley Council, Inc.’s motion to dismiss must be denied.”
“the judgment of the Magistrate is reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this decision.”
“I agree With the Magistrate’s conclusion that this actioh should be dismissed.”
After trial, Freedman entered judgment for the employer because accommodating the employee’s Sabbath schedule would have imposed more than a minimal cost.
“plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction in this present action is DENIED.”
“the motion to withdraw reference is denied.”
“the EPA’s motion for a more definite statement is DENIED.”
“the defendant Shell’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is ALLOWED.”
“the Court ALLOWS partial summary judgment and awards statutory damages of $10,000 and attorneys’ fees in the amount of $3,613.53. The Court DENIES summary judgment with respect to the final five alleged infringements”
“the Court ALLOWS partial summary judgment and awards statutory damages of $10,000 and attorneys’ fees in the amount of $3,613.53.”
“DENIES the request for equitable relief without prejudice.”
“Plaintiffs Objections to the Order of the Magistrate Allowing Defendants’ Motion to Strike Claim for Jury Trial is OVERRULED, and the Magistrate’s Order is AFFIRMED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 4148 days (N = 5).
The twenty located dockets are a historical archive slice, not a complete career caseload. All were terminated. Civil-rights, contract, disability-benefits, and other government-defendant matters predominated, with additional product-liability, land-condemnation, information-access, and personal-injury cases.
A historical record
Judge Freedman 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.