Hector Manuel Laffitte
Judge Laffitte no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Laffitte decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He treated genuine disputes over authorization, audience, and benefit as jury questions unsuitable for summary judgment.
“Where ‘reasonable minds could differ as to the import of the evidence,’ as is the case here, summary judgment is inappropriate.”
He enforced arbitration awards unless the challenger could clear the difficult manifest-disregard standard.
“The standard of review for vacating or setting aside and arbitration award has created a difficult hurdle for the Plaintiff which it has failed to cross.”
Procedural preferences
He required summary-judgment fact submissions to include record citations and disregarded unsupported statements.
“this document does not provide record citations. Thus, the Court will not consider co-defendant Dr. Torres' statement of facts because it does not comply with Local Rule 56(c).”
He treated caption omissions as form defects when the complaint itself clearly identified the represented party and its claims.
“It is the allegations of the complaint that determine the nature of the causes of action claimed and consequently, to whom they belong and who is claiming them.”
Cautions
He found conclusory assertions of a defense insufficient to obtain relief from default.
“Mere conclusory statements that a defense exists are insufficient to demonstrate the existence of meritorious defense as a factor favoring setting aside default.”
He warned that seeking the maximum criminal charge carries greater evidentiary risk when a lesser charge would fit the proof.
“It is a stark reminder once again of the greater risks and pitfalls associated with seeking the maximum charge and penalty for an alleged crime.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, based on the record and for the reasons above, the Court denies defendant’s petition for bail.”
“WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES co-defendant PCH’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of non-diverse indispensable party (Dkt.52).”
“WHEREFORE, the Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 16) is denied.”
“WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs motions to compel full payment of the Judgment (Docket.No.127) and to enforce judgment (Docket.No.131) are denied.”
“Based upon this de novo review, the Court concludes that the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion made pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is denied.”
“Accordingly, Cruz-Santiago’s conviction must be reversed for insufficiency of evidence.”
“In view of the aforementioned, Defendants’ motion is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“For the aforementioned reasons, the Court concludes that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims. Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), the Court hereby remands this case back to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Court of First Instance Superior Court, Aguadilla Part.”
“For the reasons set forth below, co-defendant Urban Transit Solutions, Inc.’s motion to set aside entry of default is hereby DENIED.”
“WHEREFORE the Court grants in part and denies in part defendant International College’s motion to amend judgment (Docket No. 19), and grants in part plaintiff Ceinos’ motion for attorneys’ fees (Docket No. 18).”
“WHEREFORE, defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and to allow for inspection of jury lists and jury venire procedure, Dkt. 192, is hereby denied as lacking in merit.”
“The Court therefore GRANTS González’s Urgent Petition for Return of Child Wrongfully Retained (Docket No. 1).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The 60 located assigned cases included 59 terminated matters and one pending miscellaneous matter. Social Security disability review was the largest category, followed by foreclosure, contract, civil-rights, and student-loan cases; terminated cases had a median filing-to-termination duration of 1,001 days. This is not a career-wide caseload measure.
A historical record
Judge Laffitte 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.