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

Julia Smith Gibbons

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee district Retired 2002 · served 1983–2002 Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 21 signed orders read

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

How Judge Gibbons decides

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

What persuades

She applies Section 16(b) of the securities laws as a deliberately mechanical, title-based rule, resisting a fact-intensive inquiry into whether a particular officer actually had inside information.

“courts have sought to interpret section 16(b) in a way that will preserve its ‘mechanical qualities.’”

In ERISA collection suits she holds that a corporate parent's officers and shareholders are not statutory employers and cannot be reached on the statutory definition alone, absent facts warranting piercing the corporate veil.

“to the extent that plaintiff bases his theory of Peter Perez’s liability on the statutory definition of ERISA, his claim must fail.”

Procedural preferences

On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion she recites and applies the demanding no-set-of-facts standard, denying dismissal unless the non-moving party can prove no facts entitling it to relief.

“the motion must be denied unless it appears beyond doubt that the non-movant can prove no set of facts which would permit relief.”

Signed rulings

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

Ergon, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co.
· 1997-03-21
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Amoco’s motion to dismiss is granted as to Ergon’s claims for strict liability and for violations of Tennessee’s Solid Waste Disposal Act and Water Quality Control Act. As to all other claims, defendant’s motion is denied.”

Motion to amend (plaintiff) Granted

“motion to amend its complaint to properly plead notice is granted.”

Kellogg Co. v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
· 2001-06-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING AND PARTIALLY DENYING EXXON MOBIL’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITH RESPECT TO TRADEMARK DILUTION”

Savers Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Home Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
· 1989-06-06
Summary judgment (cross-defendant) Granted

“After reviewing the pleadings, affidavits, depositions and exhibits submitted to the court, the cross-defendants’ motions are granted.”

Motions to strike (cross-defendant) Denied

“the court, having considered Breithaupt’s supplements, denies the motion to strike.”

Harper v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.
· 1998-07-10
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Therefore, the court grants Georgia-Pacific’s motion for summary judgment as to Harper’s § 1981 claim.”

Caruso v. St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Inc.
· 2002-07-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“In summary, the court grants St. Jude’s motion for summary judgment on all of Caruso’s claims.”

Young v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
· 1994-08-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

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

Wooley v. Madison County, Tennessee
· 2002-06-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT”

Jones v. Intuition, Inc.
· 1998-05-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“grants the motions of defendants InTuition and TSAC in their entirety”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“the court denies plaintiffs motion for summary judgment”

Kutner v. Sprint Communications Co. LP
· 1997-03-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and plaintiffs claims are dismissed in their entirety”

In re SCB Computer Technology, Inc., Securities Litigation
· 2001-02-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“defendants’ motions to dismiss are granted in their entirety. This case is dismissed with prejudice.”

Shelby County Health Care Corp. v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Local 1733
· 1991-01-31
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“The plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is granted and the defendant’s motion is denied.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied
Orr v. Interstate Commerce Commission
· 1988-11-17
Summary judgment (government) Granted in part

“Therefore, summary judgment is granted as to the interstate commerce allegations. The issues arising out of petitioner’s claim for undercharges in intrastate commerce remain for trial.”

A historical record

Judge Gibbons 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.