William Hitz

William Hitz was a federal appellate judge who served on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 1931 until his death in 1935. Born in Washington, D.C., in 1872, he had a distinguished legal career that included private practice, service at the Department of Justice, and nearly fifteen years on the trial court for the District of Columbia before his elevation to the circuit bench. Appointed by President Herbert Hoover, a Republican, Hitz's brief tenure on the appellate court was marked by a significant constitutional case concerning judicial compensation and the status of federal courts in the District of Columbia. He was known in legal circles by the nickname Billy Hitz and maintained a reputation as an engaging personality within the Washington legal community.

Early life and legal career

William Hitz was born on April 21, 1872, in Washington, D.C., where he would spend his entire professional life. He pursued his undergraduate education at Harvard University, one of the nation's most prestigious institutions, before returning to the nation's capital to study law. In 1900, he earned his Bachelor of Laws degree from Georgetown Law, establishing the foundation for what would become a lengthy career in the legal profession within the District of Columbia.

Following his admission to the bar, Hitz entered private practice in Washington, D.C., where he worked for fourteen years from 1900 to 1914. During this period, he developed expertise in the practice of law within the unique legal environment of the nation's capital, which operated under a distinct judicial and governmental structure compared to the states. His work in private practice provided him with extensive experience in the courts of the District of Columbia and familiarity with both local and federal legal matters.

In 1914, Hitz transitioned from private practice to government service when he joined the United States Department of Justice as a special attorney. He served in this capacity for two years, from 1914 to 1916, gaining experience in federal legal matters and working on behalf of the United States government. This position represented a natural progression in his career and demonstrated his capabilities to federal officials who would later consider him for judicial appointments. His work at the Department of Justice coincided with the administration of President Woodrow Wilson and occurred during a period of significant legal and political developments in the nation.

Federal appellate service

Hitz's judicial career began in 1916 when he was appointed to the trial court for the District of Columbia. President Woodrow Wilson gave him a recess appointment on November 15, 1916, to serve as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, the trial court that would later be renamed the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. This appointment filled a vacancy that had been created by the departure of Associate Justice Thomas H. Anderson. President Wilson formally nominated Hitz to the same position on December 15, 1916, and the United States Senate confirmed the nomination on January 2, 1917. He received his commission the same day and began what would be nearly fifteen years of service on the trial bench.

Hitz's service on the trial court continued until 1931, when he was elevated to the appellate level. On January 5, 1931, President Herbert Hoover, a Republican, nominated him to serve on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which would be renamed the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on June 7, 1934, and is now known as the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. This appointment was to a newly created Associate Justice seat that had been authorized by federal statute. The Senate confirmed his nomination on January 28, 1931, and he received his commission on February 6, 1931. His service on the trial court formally terminated on February 13, 1931, upon his elevation to the circuit court.

During his time on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Hitz became involved in a significant constitutional dispute regarding judicial compensation. In 1932, Congress passed an appropriations bill that reduced the salaries of judges serving on the District of Columbia courts. The prevailing view in Congress at that time was that these judges presided over a legislative court rather than a constitutional court established under Article III of the Constitution, and therefore were not entitled to the protections afforded to Article III judges, including the Compensation Clause's prohibition against diminishing judicial salaries during a judge's tenure.

Hitz disagreed with this characterization and believed himself to be an Article III judge entitled to constitutional protections. Acting on this conviction, he filed suit in the United States Court of Claims seeking to recover the difference in wages that had been withheld as a result of the salary reduction. The case, which became known as O'Donoghue v. United States, eventually reached the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in Hitz's favor, holding that the courts of the District of Columbia were both constitutional courts under Article III and legislative courts, thereby affirming that judges serving on these courts were entitled to the protections of Article III, including protection against salary diminution.

Hitz's service on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ended with his death on July 3, 1935, after approximately four years on the appellate bench.

Jurisprudence and legacy

While the specific details of Hitz's judicial opinions and legal philosophy are not extensively documented in available records, his involvement in the O'Donoghue case represents a significant contribution to constitutional law regarding the status of federal courts in the District of Columbia. The case established important precedent concerning the dual nature of the District's courts and the constitutional protections afforded to their judges, resolving a question that had practical implications for judicial independence and the separation of powers.

Beyond his judicial work, Hitz was remembered for his personal qualities and his presence within the Washington legal community. He was known as a witty individual and a colorful storyteller, characteristics that distinguished him among his colleagues on the bench and at the bar. These personal attributes suggest that he brought not only legal acumen but also a distinctive personality to his judicial service, contributing to the culture and collegiality of the courts on which he served.

Hitz's influence extended to the next generation through his family. He had two sons, Freddie and Billy, both of whom followed their father into the legal profession by becoming lawyers themselves. This continuation of legal service within his family represents a form of legacy beyond his judicial opinions, as his example and guidance helped shape the careers of those who came after him.

His career trajectory, from private practice through government service to the trial bench and ultimately to the federal appellate court, exemplified a traditional path of advancement within the legal profession of his era. His nearly two decades of federal judicial service, spanning both trial and appellate levels, provided him with comprehensive experience in the federal judiciary and the unique legal landscape of the nation's capital.