P. Bradley Murray
How Judge Murray rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Murray
P. Bradley Murray joined the United States Magistrate Judge bench for the Southern District of Alabama in 2017. He earned degrees from the University of Virginia and the University of Alabama School of Law. Before his appointment, he taught school and practiced civil litigation and criminal defense.
Judge Murray's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Murray's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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).
How Judge Murray decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a prison-officials' summary-judgment motion, internal inconsistencies among the defendants' own incident report, body charts, and affidavits were themselves enough to defeat the motion, without crediting either side's narrative.
“At this time, the record evidence raises more questions than it answers, and ‘the Court cannot simply accept the officers’ subjective version of events, but rather must reconstruct the event in the light most favorable to the non-moving party’ to determine whether the use of force was excessive.”
On Social Security appeals, an ALJ's bare, boilerplate conclusion that no listing was met or equaled, without saying which listings were considered, prevents meaningful judicial review and requires remand.
“The ALJ did not state which listings were considered nor did he provide any analysis or reasoning for rejecting all listings.”
A federal civil-rights suit that overlaps an ongoing state proceeding over the same underlying dispute is treated as a Younger abstention problem, not decided on the merits of the federal claims.
“The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the Younger abstention doctrine because their claims are the subject of ongoing state judicial proceedings in the Hale County Circuit Court related to the property at issue.”
In Adams v. Bisignano, affirmed an administrative assessment that discounted standing and walking limits from a consulting doctor when the limits conflicted with the doctor’s examination and the claimant’s sporadic, conservative treatment.
“The fact that Adams's back and knee pain was treated only sporadically and conservatively by Dr. McCleod bolsters the ALJ's finding that Dr. Vines's restrictions were inconsistent with Adams's treatment records and were not supported by Dr. Vines's own examination.”
Procedural preferences
In Robbins v. Conecuh County, he converted the limitations issue in a motion to dismiss into a summary judgment motion and gave both sides a chance to submit evidence and briefing.
“the Court determined that evidentiary submissions were necessary to determine the potentially dispositive statute of limitations issue; therefore, the Court converted Smith’s motion to dismiss on this narrow and sole ground to a motion for summary judgment. The Court so notified the parties and gave them each an opportunity to submit evidence and further briefing on this issue.”
Before a party may file a motion to compel discovery, the judge requires counsel to first hold a conference with him, usually by telephone.
“With motions to compel, Judge Murray requires that lawyers hold a conference with him, usually by telephone, before filing the motion.”
He requires an alternative-dispute-resolution plan in every scheduling order and treats settlement conferences and mediation as one of the most important parts of the job, though the conferences themselves are held only by the parties' agreement.
“Judge Murray is enthusiastic about mediation and considers it one of the most important parts of his job. His scheduling order requires the parties to submit an alternative dispute resolution plan.”
In Hartline, Murray treated a late call to the clerk as a request for more time, extended the pro se plaintiff’s deadline, and later recommended dismissal without prejudice after she still failed to provide the required filings.
“the undersigned broadly construed Hartline’s conversation with the Clerk’s Office as containing a request for additional time to comply with those orders and the undersigned granted that implicit request.”
Cautions
A prisoner-plaintiff's failure to disclose prior litigation on the complaint form, signed under penalty of perjury, is treated as an abuse of process warranting dismissal as malicious under Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), independent of any filing-fee issue.
“Because Plaintiff was not truthful in his complaint about his prior litigation, his action is subject to being dismissed as malicious for abusing the judicial process.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 41) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“the undersigned Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that Defendants’ motions to dismiss be GRANTED and that this action be DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Defendant Watford’s Motion to Strike (Doc. 10) is thereby MOOT.”
“the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed without prejudice and with leave to file an Amended Complaint.”
Sua sponte recommendation to dismiss an inmate's complaint for failure to pay the filing fee after being warned.
Pro se civil-rights complaint recommended dismissed for failure to pay a filing fee after an express warning; the order notes the plaintiff was given extra time because he was not incarcerated.
An inmate's Section 1983 complaint recommended dismissed after he neither paid the filing fee nor sought IFP status.
“the Court RECOMMENDS granting leave to file the counterclaim and that Pinnacle Properties’ motion to dismiss counterclaims be DENIED.”
A pro se employment-discrimination complaint recommended dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee or provide a right-to-sue letter, despite the court construing an untimely phone call as an implicit request for extra time.
“It is ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff Marilyn Jackson’s claim for benefits be REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff Edward Martin’s claim for benefits is hereby REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits should be reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this decision.”
Prisoner screening under Section 1915(e)(2)(B): the plaintiff had not disclosed two prior actions concerning his imprisonment on the complaint form, an abuse-of-process ground for dismissal as malicious under Rivera v. Allin.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled caseload spans consent Social Security appeals, consumer class litigation, employment discrimination, prisoner civil rights, and products-liability suits, coming to him both by consent of the parties and by referral from an Article III judge.
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 months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 2 |
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 Southern District of Alabama, not for Judge Murray: 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.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 352 | 10.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 98 | 6.7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 238 | 10.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 8 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 352 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 424 | 9.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 389 | 10 months |
| Sep 2022 | 457 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 457 | 10.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 998 | 4.5 months |
| Sep 2019 | 407 | 9.4 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 Murray with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Murray, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Murray's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace