Liles C. Burke

How Judge Burke rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Position
District judge
Appointed by
Donald Trump (Republican)
Commissioned
October 17, 2018
Education
University of Alabama (B.A., 1991); University of Alabama School of Law (J.D., 1994)
Signed orders read
26

About Judge Burke

Liles Clifton Burke is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Burke received a commission on October 17, 2018.

Judge Burke's practices and standing orders

Rules for cases before Judge Burke, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.

Key rules

Contacting chambers

Copy opposing counsel or unrepresented parties on communications to chambers.

“Ex parte communications are forbidden: all communications to the chambers email address must show that all opposing counsel or pro se parties have been copied.”

Motions

Before a motion other than summary judgment or remand, contact the respondent to determine whether it will be opposed.

“Prior to filing any motion, other than a summary-judgment motion or a motion to remand, the movant must contact the respondent”

Discovery

Schedule a telephone conference with the court before filing a discovery-dispute motion.

“must schedule a telephone conference with the Court before filing a motion arising out of a discovery dispute”

Standing orders for every case in this court

Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).

Key rules from these orders · The court's local rules ↗

How Judge Burke decides

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

What persuades

In the Corporate Transparency Act challenge, Burke held that the statute exceeded Congress’s enumerated powers and granted the challengers’ summary judgment motion.

“The Corporate Transparency Act is unconstitutional because it cannot be justified as an exercise of Congress’ enumerated powers.”

In one premises-liability case, the court granted summary judgment because the undisputed record established that the defendant property owner owed the plaintiff no duty.

“Because Wolfe Partners owed no such duty, it cannot be said to have consciously omitted it, and Allen’s wantonness claim fails as a matter of law.”

Procedural preferences

In Jones v. Speedway, he granted an unopposed summary judgment motion after reviewing its merits under Rule 56(e).

“Speedway's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 24) is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

In United States v. Thomas, he reviewed the challenged portions of a suppression recommendation de novo and adopted the magistrate judge’s findings.

“Having reviewed de novo the proposed findings and recommendations, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 43) should be ACCEPTED and hereby ADOPTS it as the findings of the Court.”

Cautions

In Crow v. Nurse Cindy, he adopted a recommendation to dismiss the prisoner’s case for failure to exhaust available administrative remedies.

“the defendants' motions to dismiss are due to be granted based on the plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a).”

Signed rulings

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

National Small Business United v. Yellen
5:22-cv-01448-LCB · 2024-03-01
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“The Court GRANTS the Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 23) and DENIES the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or Alternative Cross[-Motion for Summary Judgment].”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied
Jones v. Speedway, LLC
5:22-cv-00724-LCB · 2024-11-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Speedway's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 24) is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Crow v. Nurse Cindy
2:22-cv-00710-LCB-JHE · 2024-09-06
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the defendants' motions to dismiss are due to be granted based on the plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a).”

McNear v. Dunn
4:19-cv-01805-LCB-GMB · 2022-07-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the defendants' motions for summary judgment (Docs. 27, 39, 54) are due to be GRANTED.”

Motion other (plaintiff) Denied

“the plaintiff's motion for an extension of time and request for production of documents (Doc. 54) and Rule 56(e) motion (Doc. 55) is DENIED.”

Phillips v. City of Hanceville, Alabama, et al.
5:22-cv-00987-LCB · 2025-07-08
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Defendants' motions for summary judgment, Docs. 31, 32. As a result, the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and the Clerk is ORDERED to close the case.”

Motion for sanctions (plaintiff) Denied

“Phillips' Motion for Sanctions, Doc. 59, is DENIED”

Nix v. Warden John Hutton, et al.
7:24-cv-00337-LCB-SGC · 2025-09-10
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (Doc. 13).”

United Benefits, LLC v. Anthony Caputo, et al.
3:24-cv-01517-LCB · 2025-08-26
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court finds that United Benefits is not entitled to relief from conduct it consented to, and the motion for injunctive relief is DENIED. Doc. 34.”

Billy McClain v. Kerry Warren, et al.
5:23-cv-00592-LCB · 2025-05-20
Motion to enforce settlement (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS the motion to enforce settlement. (Doc. 30). The parties are therefore ORDERED to carry out and fulfill the terms and provisions of the Mediation Term Sheet within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order”

Adaisha Garrett v. United States of America
3:24-cv-08007-LCB · 2025-07-11
Motion to vacate sentence 2255 (petitioner) Denied

“Garrett's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct her sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED. Doc. 1.”

Isaac Jerome Smith v. Warden M. Kimberly
1:24-cv-00232-LCB-JHE · 2025-03-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the respondent's motion to dismiss (Doc. 15) is due to be granted and the petition is due to be dismissed as moot.”

Allen Davis v. YMCA of Metropolitan Huntsville, Alabama
5:25-cv-00054-LCB · 2025-05-22
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Appellee's motion to dismiss (Doc. 7) is GRANTED, and it is ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED.”

United States v. Kelvin Thomas
7:18-cr-00400-LCB-JHE-2 · 2026-02-12
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“The Court therefore OVERRULES Thomas’s objections (Doc. 325) and ORDERS that Thomas’s Amended Motion to Suppress (Doc. 317) be DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 402 days (N = 17).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 185 days (N = 1).

The reviewed cases provide illustrative case-mix context rather than an exhaustive count. No administrative disposition baseline is available after mid-2021.

Pending matters in the official report

Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.

Motions pending more than six months5
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years13
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Mar 2026513
Sep 20251411
Mar 20255213
Sep 20247612
Mar 2024387
Sep 202384
Mar 2023010
Sep 202208
Mar 202206
Sep 2021105
Mar 202105
Sep 2020103

A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.

How long civil cases take in this court

For the whole of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, not for Judge Burke: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

CasesMedian time
All civil cases closed1,5138.7 months
Closed with no court action1132.5 months
Closed before pretrial1,3809.1 months
Closed during or after pretrial6not reported
Closed during trial1432.8 months
12 months endingCases closedMedian time
Sep 20251,5138.7 months
Sep 20241,2908.6 months
Sep 20231,3879.3 months
Sep 20221,50711.3 months
Sep 20211,80310.8 months
Sep 20201,50710.9 months
Sep 20191,73210.8 months

The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).

Draft for Judge Burke with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Burke, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Burke's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace