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

Justin Lowe Quackenbush

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington district Retired 1995 · served 1980–1995 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 12 signed orders read

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

How Judge Quackenbush decides

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

What persuades

He treated clear statutory text as controlling without seeking state-court certification.

“This court does not find that statute to be ambiguous requiring interpretation by the Washington Supreme Court. The term ‘less than natural life’ is clear.”

He evaluated a fee claim across the government's conduct before and during litigation, and limited recovery once its position became reasonable.

“The court finds that the government’s original offer of $1800.00 was unreasonable in light of the ultimate award.”

He remanded an administrative appeal when the agency used the wrong legal standard.

“Since the ALJ applied the wrong legal standard when he applied the federal standard to the disability determination, the matter must be and is REMANDED for application of the correct legal standard.”

Procedural preferences

He favored staged trial management when the expected savings outweighed the risk of repeated testimony.

“The court, however, finds that the burden of speculative costs and extra time that such testimony might require is outweighed by the potential savings that trifurcation offers all involved.”

When personal jurisdiction was lacking, he preferred transfer over dismissal where transfer preserved a merits adjudication.

“However, the Court will not dismiss the action but rather will transfer the entire case to the United States District Court for the District of Idaho.”

Cautions

A search-warrant affidavit needed facts supporting both an informant's reliability and the basis of knowledge; innocuous corroboration was not enough.

“The mere presence of an ether smell, however, would be insufficient to establish that criminal activity was occurring. Ether is a non-contraband substance which has many legal uses including starting car engines.”

Signed rulings

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

Bianchi v. Kincheloe
· 1989-06-02
Motion to supplement briefing (defendants) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s Motion To Be Allowed Supplemental Briefing is GRANTED.”

Motion for reconsideration (defendants) Denied

“Accordingly, defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration or for Certification is DENIED.”

Troncoso v. Martin Archery, Inc.
· 1989-03-24
Motion to trifurcate (defendants) Granted

“For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion was GRANTED.”

United States v. 0.51 Acre of Land
· 1984-09-04
Motion for attorney fees (defendants) Granted in part

“ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES”

Hanson v. Heckler
· 1984-08-30
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted in part

“I have concluded that the plaintiff is entitled to recover attorney fees in the amount of $1,087.50, representing claimed hours of 14.50 at an hourly rate of $75.00.”

Fort v. Reed
· 1985-12-12
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE”

Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Having so concluded, plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Ct.Rec. 44) are DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied
Industrial Indemnity v. Snyder
· 1984-05-10
Summary judgment (Internal Revenue Service) Granted

“Accordingly, the IRS’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”

Fred v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of Yakima Indian Nation
· 1985-09-06
Summary judgment (state and joined plaintiffs) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED the state’s Motion for Summary Judgment, joined by the municipal and individual plaintiffs, is GRANTED.”

United States v. Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District
· 1986-11-24
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Having so concluded, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Denied

“Because plaintiff has cited no basis for this court to award costs and attorney fees, that request is DENIED.”

United States v. Speaks
· 1986-11-17
Motion to suppress (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to suppress is GRANTED. All evidence obtained during the search pursuant to the warrant is HEREBY SUPPRESSED.”

Apex Construction, Inc. v. Huron Manufacturing Corp.
· 1980-01-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is denied and the entire case is transferred, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), to the U.S. District Court, for the District of Idaho.”

Leyva v. Buley
· 1989-03-21
Motion to certify class (plaintiffs) Granted

“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act claims and the breach of contract claims (Ct.Rec. 15), is HEREBY GRANTED pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 23.”

Motions to strike (plaintiffs) Denied

“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Memorandum in Opposition (Ct.Rec. 25) is HEREBY DENIED.”

Motions to strike (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s Motion to Strike Complaint (Ct.Rec. 29) is HEREBY DENIED.”

Motion for hearing on shortened time (plaintiffs) Granted

“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Hearing on Shortened Time (Ct.Rec. 28) is HEREBY GRANTED.”

Motion for hearing on shortened time (defendant) Granted

“Defendant’s Motion for Hearing on Shortened Time (Ct.Rec. 32) is HEREBY GRANTED.”

Coats v. Schweiker
· 1982-12-15
Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“For the reasons set forth in this memorandum, the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment should be GRANTED; the defendant’s motion should be DENIED; and the matter should be REMANDED to the ALJ for application of the proper legal standard.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“The defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and the case is REMANDED for application of the state standard.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 358.5 days (N = 10).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 6.5 days (N = 2).

The ten sampled closed matters span contract, labor, insurance, employment, consumer-finance, motor-vehicle, and prisoner civil-rights cases. Their durations describe this bounded historical sample rather than the judge's full career docket.

A historical record

Judge Quackenbush 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.