Joe J. Volpe
How Judge Volpe rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Volpe
Joe J. Volpe serves as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas in Little Rock. He issues proposed findings and recommendations in referred cases, including federal habeas matters.
Judge Volpe's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Volpe'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 Volpe decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Cautions
In Simmonds’s § 2241 case, Volpe recommended dismissing the habeas petition after finding that a prison-privileges policy did not implicate the petitioner’s due-process rights.
“The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) be DISMISSED and the requested relief be DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) be DISMISSED and the requested relief be DENIED.”
In Seyoum Ali Clark, Volpe recommended dismissing the prisoner’s civil-rights complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim and counting it as a strike. Judge Wright later adopted the recommendation.
In Orlando Clark, Volpe recommended dismissing the amended prisoner civil-rights complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim and counting the dismissal as a strike. Judge Holmes later adopted the recommendation.
In Henson, Volpe recommended dismissing the amended prisoner complaint without prejudice after the plaintiff failed to plead specific facts against any defendant. Judge Moody later adopted the recommendation.
“Separate defendants Eric Higgins, Andria Holmes, Alexus Fryer, Denika Bogard, Diane Green, Mary Green, C. Green, Christopher Moseley, Derek Harris, and Amelia Remley’s motion to dismiss is denied (Dkt. No. 25)”
“Separate defendants Eric Higgins, Andria Holmes, Alexus Fryer, Denika Bogard, Diane Green, Mary Green, Christopher Moseley, Derek Harris, and Amelia Remley’s motion for summary judgment is granted (Dkt. No. 35). Mr. Thurman’s claims against these separate defendants are dismissed with prejudice (Dkt. No. 1)”
“Mr. Barker’s § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 2) and Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 4) be DISMISSED.”
“Petitioner’s § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) be DISMISSED – his request for time-credit be dismissed without prejudice, and his request for a sentence reduction be dismissed with prejudice.”
“Mr. Lewis’s § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) be DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Mr. De La Cruz’s § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) be DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“The Medical Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 125) be GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment and Arkansas Medical Malpractice claims against Defendants Douglas and Hatchett be DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“The ADC Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 128) be GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against them be DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“the final decision of the Commissioner be affirmed, and that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice.”
“the final decision of the Commissioner be affirmed and that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
This profile does not use a separate caseload enumeration; its quantitative evidence comes from the consent Social Security appeals described below.
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 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 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 United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, not for Judge Volpe: 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 | 726 | 10.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 373 | 12.7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 338 | 7.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 2 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 13 | 30.9 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 726 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 787 | 10.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 995 | 12.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 894 | 12.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 845 | 11.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 848 | 10.9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 878 | 10.5 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 Volpe with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Volpe, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Volpe's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace