Katherine P. Nelson
How Judge Nelson rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Nelson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a public-employment equal-protection claim, the judge treated the 'class of one' theory as categorically unavailable rather than weighing it on its facts, following the Supreme Court's holding that the theory has no place in the public-employment context.
“the United States Supreme Court has held that the 'class of one' theory of equal protection 'has no place in the public employment context.'”
On a fraudulent-joinder challenge to a non-diverse defendant, the judge required clear and convincing proof and resolved any doubt in favor of remand, rather than crediting a defendant's own denial-of-responsibility affidavit at face value.
“the burden of proving fraudulent joinder by clear and convincing evidence is a heavy one which requires the court to evaluate the parties’ factual allegations and submissions in the light most favorable to the plaintiff”
Procedural preferences
After two prior repleader orders for shotgun pleading, the judge held firm on a final warning rather than granting a further chance to fix the same defect a third time.
“The Court has now twice ordered Betts to correct the 'shotgun' nature of her pleadings, explicitly warning that the second time would be the last time. ... As to Count IV, she has twice failed to do so”
Faced with a discovery-compliance dispute where counsel had repeatedly promised but not delivered responses, the judge compelled the outstanding discovery on a short deadline but declined the harsher sanction of deeming requests for admission automatically admitted, and required the requesting party to separately justify any fee award.
“The Court agrees that the Plaintiff has waited long enough for discovery responses. ... the Court is not convinced that the harsh sanction of deeming the Plaintiff’s unanswered requests for admission to De Los Santos admitted under Rule 36(a)(3) is warranted at this time.”
Cautions
A contractor's prospective repair estimate is treated as expert evidence when it supplies scope and cost opinions; forwarding the estimate without a timely expert disclosure does not satisfy the disclosure rules and may lead to exclusion.
“Forwarding a proposal email does not satisfy Rule 26(a)(2).”
The judge dismisses for failure to prosecute only after multiple warnings and a clear, final deadline: here, after three overlapping complaints and a specific order to consolidate them that the plaintiff ignored.
“Sensing an emerging pattern, the undersigned entered an order dated July 11, 2023, ordering Attia 'to refrain from filing any new complaints and IFP motions that involve[] the same defendants and/or factual allegations'”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“In accordance with the foregoing analysis, it is RECOMMENDED that the Defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) ‘Partial Motion to Dismiss’ (Doc. 29) be GRANTED and that Count IV of the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 28) be DISMISSED.”
“it is the Recommendation of the undersigned that the court dismiss Burke’s most recent § 2255 (doc. 136) petition without prejudice as a second or successive petition.”
“the undersigned further RECOMMENDS that Attia’s self-styled ‘Motion to Ask for All Movable Laptops and All Nvidia Corp. Equipment of the Defendants’ (Doc. 11) be DENIED as MOOT.”
“it is ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Plaintiffs—Joel Galarza, Vicki Wimberly, and Kathrine Carpenter—recover nothing, their claims be dismissed on the merits, and the Defendants ... recover costs from the Plaintiffs.”
“the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the motion to dismiss filed by Lowe’s (Doc. 22) be GRANTED, and that Engel’s claims against Lowe’s in this action be DISMISSED with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6).”
“the undersigned recommends that plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (doc. 22) be GRANTED, and this action be REMANDED to the Circuit Court of Wilcox County, Alabama, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), for further proceedings.”
“the undersigned RECOMMENDS that plaintiffs’ request for an award of costs and fees be DENIED.”
“the undersigned further RECOMMENDS that no action be taken by this court on the pending Motions to Dismiss (docs. 16 and 18), in view of the finding that this court lacks jurisdiction. Such motions may be considered following remand by the state court.”
“it is ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Plaintiff, Michael Bowens, recover nothing apart from certain reasonable expenses awarded March 22, 2024, his claims be dismissed on the merits, and Defendant Escambia County Board of Education recover costs from the Plaintiff.”
“it is ORDERED that the Board Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 22) is GRANTED and that Count V of the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).”
“it is recommended that NationStar’s motion to dismiss be DENIED and that NationStar be ordered to file its answer to the Complaint by a specific time established by the Court.”
“it is ORDERED that the Plaintiffs motion to compel and deem facts admitted (Doc. 38) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Specifically, his request that facts be deemed admitted under Rule 36(a)(3) is DENIED. His request to compel disclosures and discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a) is GRANTED, such that De Los Santos must serve the Plaintiff with responses to all outstanding discovery requests no later than Friday, August 28, 2015.”
A pro se state prisoner's Section 1983 suit over a prison disciplinary conviction, screened under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B) because he was proceeding in forma pauperis; the court found no protected liberty interest was at stake in the disciplinary sanctions imposed (segregation and loss of privileges short of good-time credits) and recommended dismissal. A recommendation to the district judge, not a final order.
“the motion to strike is GRANTED”
“the motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Sampled cases span a large consent Social Security disability docket alongside a general federal civil caseload: Fair Labor Standards Act wage claims, insurance and contract disputes, a product-liability removal, and consumer-protection and personal-injury matters.
- Most Social Security appeals in the sample were decided on the judge's own consent jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
- Section 636(c). Several other civil cases in the sample settled, were stayed pending a multidistrict-litigation transfer, or were voluntarily dismissed before any dispositive ruling.
Draft for Judge Nelson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Nelson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Nelson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace