William E. Cassady
How Judge Cassady rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Cassady
William E. Cassady became a United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Alabama in 1985 and served full time until March 2017. He continues to serve the court in recalled status. Before joining the bench, he practiced law in the Mobile area.
Judge Cassady's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Cassady, 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
Trial
Confer with opposing counsel and file a single proposed pretrial order at least five days before the pretrial conference.
“Counsel shall confer and shall prepare a single proposed Pretrial Order in the form attached, which must be filed with the Clerk of Court at least five (5) days before the pretrial conference.”
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 Cassady decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Clay’s excessive-force and malicious-prosecution case, Cassady found no evidence of a sufficiently pervasive practice or custom to support the plaintiff’s failure-to-train or supervision theory under Section 1983.
“Clay has not provided evidence of the 'limited circumstances' in which the allegation of a failure to train or supervise can be basis for liability under Section 1983. ... He has failed to establish any practice or custom so pervasive as to be the equivalent of a policy adopted by the final policy maker.”
In an employment-discrimination summary-judgment ruling, Cassady noted that the plaintiff had received several coaching sessions and opportunities to correct her conduct toward coworkers before termination.
“Plaintiff was given multiple opportunities to correct her actions toward co-employees, participated in several coaching sessions related to her behavior, and failed to correct her behavior.”
Procedural preferences
In Benion v. Toney, Cassady recommended dismissal with prejudice after the plaintiff failed to respond to an order that expressly warned the case could be dismissed for abandonment.
“Plaintiff was advised that failure to respond by June 4, 2012, would be considered by the Court as an abandonment of the prosecution of this case by Plaintiff and this case would be dismissed.”
In Escoffier v. iStorage PO, Cassady recommended giving the plaintiff one more opportunity to comply with an arbitration order, with a warning that another failure could lead to dismissal with prejudice.
“it is recommended that this Mr. Escoffier be given a second opportunity to comply and further, that he be warned that his failure to engage in arbitration as ordered for a second time could result in an order dismissing his case with prejudice.”
Cautions
In Theodorou v. Gonzales, Cassady recommended dismissal of a habeas challenge to post-removal detention without prejudice because the six-month presumptively reasonable period had not yet expired.
“the six-month period has not yet expired; thus, petitioner has not stated a claim for relief under 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 and Zadvydas.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“It is recommended that the instant petition be dismissed, without prejudice to being filed at a later date in the correct court, because Theodorou has prematurely filed the present attack upon his post-removal-period detention.”
A federal prisoner's Bivens action alleging a drug-quantity conspiracy among DEA agents and chemists, screened under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B): 'it is recommended that this action be dismissed with prejudice as frivolous, prior to service of process': barred both under Heck v. Humphrey absent invalidation of the underlying conviction and by the statute of limitations on the excessive-force claim.
“it is recommended that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as no other lesser sanction will suffice.”
“it is recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as no other lesser sanction will suffice.”
A prisoner's pro se filing styled as a 'Bill in Equity' against a sitting district judge, seeking relief from his own underlying criminal judgment; screened under 28 U.S.C. 1915A and recommended for dismissal with prejudice: 'failure to state a claim ... and, alternatively, as frivolous ... The dismissal of this action should be with prejudice.'
An FLSA unpaid-overtime claim resolved by a negotiated settlement on the judge's own consent jurisdiction; the judgment approved the compromise: 'This Judgment shall act to dismiss all claims of the plaintiff against the defendant with prejudice.'
“Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 57) is GRANTED as to all claims. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in its entirety.”
“it is recommended that the motion to dismiss (Doc. 29) be DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff's complaint should not be dismissed at this stage because other options are available that should gain compliance with the Court's order.”
“the Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted as to all claims and the action is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety.”
“it is recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED.”
“that the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand be DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The sampled consent Social Security cohort spans 2016-2017, decided on the judge's own consent jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
- Section 636(c). His current docket, sampled from 2023 through 2026, is a broad general civil caseload, employment, insurance, contract, consumer, personal-injury, and civil-rights matters, again largely proceeding on party consent to his jurisdiction for trial and final judgment, consistent with continued substantial recall-era service rather than a reduced part-time caseload.
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 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 1 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 2 | 0 |
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 Cassady: 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 Cassady with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Cassady, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Cassady's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace