Jeffrey U. Beaverstock
How Judge Beaverstock decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a motion attacking a retaliation claim's opposition element, the judge treated the plaintiff's specific, contemporaneous objection to a racially charged remark as sufficient at the pleading stage, distinguishing it from cases alleging only generalized opposition to discrimination.
“These factual allegations distinguish this action from, for example, Cochran v. S. Co., 2015 WL 3508018, at *2 (S.D. Ala. June 3, 2015), relied on by Defendant, wherein Judge Steele determined that the plaintiff’s complaint only alleged that she opposed discrimination generally, without specification that the discrimination was based on a characterization protected by Section 1981.”
On a qualified-immunity motion to dismiss, the judge declined to accept a federal Scope-of-Employment Certification at face value where the plaintiff's specific factual allegations (that a local sheriff's office, not a federal task force, actually investigated and directed the operation) raised a genuine threshold question the certification's conclusory 'based upon information supplied to me' language did not resolve.
“First, the Court finds the statement made by the Attorney General within the Certification to be, frankly, unhelpful: “based upon information supplied to me. . ..””
Procedural preferences
On a jurisdictional challenge, the judge resolved the case entirely on the statutory bar to review and expressly declined to reach the government's alternative merits arguments once jurisdiction was found lacking.
“Because the Court finds that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, it does not address the additional reasons the United States contends support dismissal.”
On unopposed Reports and Recommendations in prisoner, habeas, and Section 2255 matters, the judge routinely adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation in a short order, but still performs a de novo review of any objected-to portions rather than adopting wholesale.
“After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made, the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated November 9, 2023 (Doc. 4) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.”
Cautions
Where a party's summary-judgment opposition relies on an unsupported legal theory or fails to cite any authority, the judge has declined to independently research or develop the argument on the party's behalf.
“Plaintiffs fail to distinguish Ware or any of the cases upon which QBE relies. They cite no case whatever.”
When a party's own expert cannot explain the basis for the figures in a report he is offering (line items, categories, or how a cost was derived), the judge has excluded the testimony outright rather than letting the gaps go to weight; an expert who cannot account for his own numbers has effectively adopted someone else's unvetted work.
“This Court has concluded that the opinion testimony of Schoen’s designated expert, Darrell Steward, as to the reasonable and necessary costs of repair, is inadmissible.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s motion (Doc. 25) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff Hayli Lape’s “Motion to Dismiss” filed March 20, 2024 (Doc. 55), is GRANTED, and all of her claims and causes asserted against Defendant Sheriff Heath Jackson are DISMISSED without prejudice, with each party to bear his or her own costs”
“Sheriff Jackson’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 52) is accordingly found MOOT”
“For the reasons set out herein, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Complaint and the United States’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant QBE’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in all respects.”
“Plaintiff Crystal M. Harrison’s “Motion to Dismiss” filed March 20, 2024 (Doc. 50), is GRANTED, and all of her claims and causes asserted against Defendants Sheriff Heath Jackson and the County Commission of Escambia County, Alabama, are DISMISSED without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs”
“Upon due consideration, and for the reasons stated herein, Defendant Anderson’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) is GRANTED. Defendant Anderson is dismissed from this action with prejudice.”
“it is ORDERED that Angela Lawshe’s claims against Baber’s, Inc. be DISMISSED with prejudice. Further, it is ORDERED that Babers, Inc. be awarded reasonable fees and costs to remedy Lawshe’s discovery failures.”
“It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (Doc. 7, PageID.31) be and is hereby DENIED.”
“It is ORDERED that Petitioner Antonio Herrine’s habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) and this action be DISMISSED without prejudice, and that Petitioner Herrine is not entitled to the issuance of a certificate of appealability or to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.”
“To the extent Plaintiff intended the Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 13) as objections to the Report and Recommendation, they have been considered de novo and are overruled. Alternatively, Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration is denied. The Report and Recommendation is adopted as the Order of this Court.”
“For the reasons set out above, the Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 14) is GRANTED.”
“The plaintiff's motion to remand (Doc. 10) is GRANTED regarding Count One and DENIED regarding Counts Two, Three and Four. Count One is remanded to the Circuit Court of Choctaw County.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Sampled early caseload spans diversity personal-injury and insurance suits, habeas petitions, prisoner civil-rights cases, and employment discrimination claims. Most sampled cases resolved by settlement or voluntary dismissal before a dispositive motion was decided; one produced a summary-judgment ruling with a citable disposition.
Put Judge Beaverstock's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Beaverstock actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Beaverstock's own signed orders and cites them.