Steven P. Logan

United States District Court for the District of Arizona district Appointed by Barack Obama (Democratic) 18 signed orders read

Signed rulings

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

Denby v. City of Casa Grande
2:17-cv-00119-PHX-SPL
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 201) is denied.”

D'Agostino v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
2:21-cv-01292-PHX-SPL
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46) is granted. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants on all counts and terminate this action.”

Stenson Tamaddon LLC v. United States Internal Revenue Service
2:24-cv-01123-PHX-SPL
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff Stenson Tamaddon LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 39) is denied, Defendant United States of America's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 44) is granted, and this action is terminated with prejudice.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Canning v. Medtronic Incorporated
2:19-cv-04565-PHX-SPL
Motions to strike (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Strike (Doc. 126) is granted. To the extent Dr. Adams testifies regarding a manufacture defect, such testimony is excluded.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 127) is granted in part as to Plaintiff's claims for negligent design, negligent manufacture, negligent failure to warn, and strict-liability design defect. Those claims are dismissed entirely. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 127) is denied in part as to Plaintiff's claim for strict-liability manufacture defect.”

Trujillo et al v. City of Chandler et al
2:25-cv-00706-PHX-SPL
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Counts One against all Defendants, Count Two against Defendant City of Chandler, Count Three against Defendant City of Chandler, Count Four against all Defendants, Count Five against Defendant Diaz, Count Seven against Defendant Buenrostro, and Count Eight against Defendant City of Chandler are dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend to correct the deficiencies identified in this Order.”

Graven v. State of Arizona
2:19-cv-04586-PHX-SPL
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant State of Arizona's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11) is granted and this action is dismissed in its entirety. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly.”

Kennedy et al v. Mohave County et al
3:17-cv-08206-PHX-SPL
Motion for judgment on pleadings (defendant) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 161) is denied.”

Hiatt v. Sun City Festival Community Association Incorporated
2:23-cv-00552-PHX-SPL
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 49) is denied.”

Forefront Dermatology S.C. v. Crossman
2:22-cv-01895-PHX-SPL
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 6)—which was granted to the extent Plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order—is now denied to the extent Plaintiff seeks the issuance of a preliminary injunction.”

Sweidy v. Spring Ridge Academy
3:21-cv-08013-PHX-SPL
Motions to compel (defendant) Granted in part

“IT IS ORDERED that the first discovery dispute (Doc. 78) is resolved partially in Defendants' favor and partially in Plaintiff's favor. Plaintiff is directed to provide to Defendants a signed authorization for the release of her medical records from her therapy sessions with Mr. Gregory Ross. Plaintiff is not, however, directed to provide any signed authorization for the release of records from Dr. Sarah Villarreal.”

Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted in part

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (Doc. 96)—which concerns the parties' second discovery dispute—is granted in part and denied in part.”

Sweidy v. Spring Ridge Academy
3:21-cv-08013-PHX-SPL
Motions to compel (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Borges' Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff to Undergo a Rule 35 Psychological Examination (Doc. 89) is granted.”

Stenson Tamaddon LLC v. United States Internal Revenue Service
2:24-cv-01123-PHX-SPL
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Stenson Tamaddon LLC's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 14) is denied.”

Put Judge Logan's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Logan actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Logan's own signed orders and cites them.