Edwin Levon Nelson
Judge Nelson no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Nelson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He enforced an appellate ruling as law of the case when it foreclosed the remaining antitrust theory.
“The opinion of the Federal Circuit effectively forecloses Intergraph’s further pursuit of its monopoly maintenance claim.”
He rejected corporate reliance on a failed agent where the company remained capable of meeting its own tax obligations.
“There is simply no evidence that Atlas was ‘incapable by objective standards’ of carrying out its responsibilities.”
He required comparator evidence to match the plaintiff in relevant respects rather than merely share a protected category.
“plaintiff has failed to show how her proposed comparators are similarly situated.”
Procedural preferences
He treated federal jurisdiction as fixed at removal and left a proposed amendment to the state court after remand.
“The motion to amend will therefore be denied with leave to refile in state court.”
He expected counsel to resolve parallel-court confusion promptly rather than continue litigating in both forums.
“A telephone call to defendant’s counsel, a motion in this court, or a motion in the state court by Mr. Fisher”
Cautions
Hypothetical future injury did not support an insurance-fraud claim where the policyholder had received what was promised.
“Mr. Underwood’s payment of premiums on the policy is not a concrete injury because, to date, he has received precisely what he paid for”
An employee who could not perform essential job functions during predictable busy periods was not qualified under the ADA.
“Her employment during December 31, 1992, is relevant, because it shows that her disabilities caused her to suffer a ‘meltdown’ when her work station became busy”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the defendant’s motion for summary judgment as directed to Intergraph’s remaining antitrust claim is GRANTED. All remaining antitrust claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the court finds that the decision of the bankruptcy court is due to be and is hereby AFFIRMED.”
“The petition for the writ of habeas corpus is DENIED;”
“the petition for the writ of habeas corpus is DENIED;”
“The defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED;”
“Upon due consideration, the Court finds the PSC Motion to Intervene is due to be granted.”
“the motions to dismiss will be granted in all respects.”
“the plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand will be DENIED”
“the decision of the Commissioner denying the plaintiff supplemental security income benefits is hereby REVERSED and the cause REMANDED.”
“the government’s summary judgment motion will be granted.”
“Plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint is hereby Denied with leave to refile in state court.”
“this case be and it is hereby Remanded to the Circuit Court of Sumter County, Alabama”
“The defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed February 20, 1998, is GRANTED.”
“it is hereby ordered that the plaintiffs claim for mental distress damages — paragraph 21(f) of the complaint — is STRICKEN.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 132 days (N = 20).
The 20 located assigned cases were all later terminated and included civil-rights, insurance, prisoner, employment, product-liability, contract, tax, fraud, and benefits matters. This archival slice does not establish the distribution of Nelson's full caseload.
A historical record
Judge Nelson 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.