Edward Silsby Farrington
Judge Farrington no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Farrington decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Farrington treated evidence outside the noticed administrative record as incompatible with a fair opportunity to test the basis for agency action.
“All parties must be fully apprised of the evidence submitted or to be considered, and must be given opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, to inspect documents, and to offer evidence in explanation or rebuttal.”
He enforced equitable trust principles to prevent a wrongdoer from retaining the proceeds of misappropriated property.
“Equity will never permit a wrongdoer to profit by his fraud.”
A utility challenging regulated rates had to overcome the presumption that the commission's rates were reasonable.
“the évidence is insufficient to overcome the presumption in favor of the reasonableness of the rates fixed in the order complained of.”
Procedural preferences
Farrington required essential facts to be pleaded directly rather than supplied by inference.
“Facts which are material and essential to a cause of action should not be supplied by mere inference, assisted by a liberal, or perhaps strained, construction of the pleading. Such facts ought to be set out in clear, positive terms.”
He applied statutory removal procedure strictly and treated compliance as a condition of federal jurisdiction.
“removal is purely a matter of grace, and the method by which defendant may avail itself thereof is provided by the statute”
He used procedural discretion to preserve appellate review when doing so served the ends of justice.
“He is at liberty to depart from their terms to subserve the ends of justice.”
Cautions
A party seeking specific performance of a stock contract needed facts showing that money damages were inadequate.
“There is nothing in the bill showing that like stock cannot be readily purchased in the market.”
Farrington rejected speculative lost-profit allegations that did not state a recoverable cause of action.
“plaintiff has .failed to state a cause of action entitling it to recover any part or portion of the $79,010.76 claimed as damages for loss of profits.”
He regarded severe bodily mutilation as impermissible punishment even where a harsher penalty was legally available.
“The fact that the extreme penalty is not exacted is evidence that the criminal is considered worthy to live, and to attempt reformation.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The demurrer is overruled, and defendant given 20 days to answer.”
“On the authority of these two decisions I shall grant defendant’s motion. The order will be entered accordingly.”
“The witness Taylor is therefore ordered to affix his signature to the deposition forthwith, but, as the limit of the court’s authority over the documents has been reached, no order will issue directing the notary to attach the exhibits to the deposition.”
“Under the authority of the case last cited, I must overrule the motion in arrest of judgment.”
“The demurrer is overruled, and the. defendant will have 20 days within which to answer.”
“The demurrer is overruled, and the defendants granted 20 days within which to answer.”
“Under that rule the demurrer cannot be sustained on the ground of misjoinder of defendants.”
“The restraining order heretofore entered in this cause will be continued pending the suit.”
“The deeds as mortgages of realty are valid. In so far as they were intended to convey or mortgage personal property, they are invalid as against complainant. Defendant is not entitled to rents collected by plaintiff.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The 24 classified decisions cover a broad litigation sample but do not establish the distribution of Farrington's full caseload.
A historical record
Judge Farrington 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.