Susan Webber Wright

How Judge Wright rules, drawn from 33 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Position
district
Appointed by
George H. W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
1990-01-24
Education
Randolph-Macon Woman's College (B.A., 1970); University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (M.P.A., 1973); University of Arkansas School of Law (J.D., 1975)
Signed orders read
33

How Judge Wright decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In the reviewed search case, conflicting accounts about whether consent was voluntary defeated qualified-immunity summary judgment. Evidence that leaves the predicate facts disputed keeps the reasonableness question from being resolved as a matter of law.

“Based upon the record, the Court finds a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether plaintiff voluntarily consented to the search of his residence and grounds.”

A short delay in answering did not justify default where it caused no demonstrated prejudice. The reviewed order reflects the strong preference for deciding a case on its merits rather than using default for a marginal timing failure.

“Meade does not contend that Wolfe’s nine-day delay in filing his answer will adversely affect her ability to prosecute, and the Court finds that Wolfe’s marginal failure to comply with time requirements does not warrant a default judgment against him.”

Procedural preferences

A denied transfer request must produce a material employment disadvantage to support a discrimination claim. A purely lateral move with no reduction in pay, benefits, or career prospects did not qualify in the reviewed case.

“A purely lateral transfer, one that involves only minor changes in working conditions and no reduction in pay or benefits, does not amount to a demotion and cannot qualify as materially adverse employment action.”

For removal under the Class Action Fairness Act, resemblance to a class action is not enough. The action must actually be filed under Rule 23 or a similar state procedure.

“Because the lawsuit was not filed under Rule 23 or a similar state statute as a class action, this Court has no jurisdiction.”

Cautions

Compassionate release requires both extraordinary and compelling circumstances and consistency with the sentencing factors. A manageable medical condition and generalized fear of infection were insufficient, and offense severity independently weighed against release.

“Even if Defendant could establish extraordinary and compelling reasons, his request for relief must be denied because of the § 3553(a) factors – specifically, protecting the public from additional crimes by Defendant and reflecting the severity of the offense.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

McWhirter v. Ramsey
2:12-cv-00199-SWW · 2014-04-14
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Ramsey's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docs. 62) is GRANTED, and the cruel and unusual punishment claim raised against her is DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE, while the retaliation claim raised against her is DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Horn, Hopkins, and Cowell's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docs. 65) is GRANTED, and all claims raised against them are DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE.”

Thomas v. Ryals
4:17-cv-00661-SWW-JTK · 2018-09-17
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants= Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 32) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff=s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

King v. Lindsey Management Co.
4:07-cv-01081-SWW · 2008-08-22
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“The Court denies Lindsey's motion to dismiss the amended complaint. ... IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Lindsey's motion to dismiss [docket entry106] is denied”

Motion to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“The Court denies plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(e), which provides that a copy of the amended complaint must be attached to the motion to amend.”

Hentz v. Shinseki
4:12-cv-00112-SWW · 2012-07-24
Voluntary dismissal (plaintiff) Granted

“The Court finds plaintiff's motion to dismiss with prejudice [docket entry 10] should be and is hereby granted. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed with prejudice.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Moot / procedural

“Because the Court dismisses plaintiff's complaint with prejudice and does not retain jurisdiction, defendants' motion [docket entry 7] is moot.”

Wofford v. Holladay
4:16-cv-00143 · 2017-02-17
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 47) is GRANTED and this cause of action is dismissed with prejudice.”

Garren v. Mize
4:05-cv-00912 · 2006-05-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant's motion for summary judgment [docket entry 46] is hereby denied.”

Clark v. Veneman
3:04-cv-00275 · 2005-11-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment (docket entry #8) is GRANTED. Pursuant to the judgment entered together with this order, this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Duncan v. Arkansas Department of Community Correction
2:05-cv-00233 · 2008-01-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' motion for summary judgment (docket entry #24) is GRANTED. There being no issues remaining for trial, pursuant to the judgment entered together with this order, this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Smith v. Pulaski County Special School District
4:16-cv-00574 · 2017-02-28
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 13] is GRANTED. Pursuant to the judgment entered together with this order, this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Whiten v. Stuttgart Regional Medical Center
5:07-cv-00026 · 2008-01-28
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment is granted. Plaintiff's state law claim of outrage is dismissed without prejudice. Her remaining claims are dismissed with prejudice.”

Brewer v. McCann
3:10-cv-00245 · 2012-01-05
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Debra McMullin (docket entry #60) is GRANTED, Plaintiff's claims against McMullin are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and McMullin's name is removed as a party Defendant.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants John Smith, Jeremy Sparks, and Rick Webb (docket entry #63) is GRANTED.”

Guest v. Craighead County Sheriff's Department
3:04-cv-00290 · 2005-07-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the City defendants' motion for summary judgment should be and hereby is granted in its entirety”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“the County defendants' motion for summary judgment should be and hereby is granted in part and denied in part. This action will proceed against Craighead County Sheriff Deputies Jared Bassham, Ron Richardson, and Leon Johnson in their individual capacities only and solely on plaintiff's claim of excessive force.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Among the reviewed cases, felony criminal matters generally remained open longer than prisoner-screening, Federal Tort Claims Act, and Section 2255 matters. The limited set does not describe the full docket.

Draft for Judge Wright with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Wright, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Wright's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace