Barbara Milano Keenan
How Judge Keenan rules, drawn from 55 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Keenan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A statutory claim failed where its unambiguous requirement of a monetary loss did not extend to nonredeemable virtual resources used only inside a game.
“The statutory term ‘money,’ as employed in the Loss Recovery Statute, is unambiguous and does not encompass virtual resources available and used only within Game of War.”
A land-use burden was not attributable to the government when the applicants knowingly chose a nonconforming property without a reasonable preexisting expectation of approval.
“A self-imposed hardship generally will not support a substantial burden claim under RLUIPA, because the hardship was not imposed by governmental action altering a legitimate, pre-existing expectation that a property could be obtained for a particular land use.”
Procedural preferences
Each alleged debt-collection violation carried its own limitations period; earlier similar conduct did not time-bar later actionable communications.
“Accordingly, we conclude that Section 1692k(d) establishes a separate one-year limitations period for each violation of the FDCPA.”
A party could not preserve removal as a fallback after substantial state-court litigation; the forum choice had to be made promptly.
“Both the 30-day removal deadline and the waiver doctrine require that a party defending claims filed against it make a timely choice, either to defend the case in state court or to remove promptly to a federal forum.”
A post-dispute concession could not save an arbitration clause whose essential choice-of-law terms prospectively waived federal statutory rights.
“In essence, BMO Harris seeks to rewrite the unenforceable foreign choice of law provision in order to save the remainder of the arbitration agreement.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, we hold that the district court correctly applied New York’s six-year statute of limitations to the Club’s claims arising under its maritime insurance contract with Dann. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“In conclusion, we vacate the district court’s judgment finding the City in violation of the Contract Clause with respect to the Tiered COLA, affirm the court’s judgment upholding the remaining portions of the Ordinance challenged in the Contract Clause claim, vacate the court’s order dismissing the Takings Clause claim, and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED”
“In conclusion, we hold that because Sonmez’s proposed jury instructions are not correct statements of law, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to give those instructions to the jury. We affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“For these reasons, Wynn’s revocation sentence is not unreasonable, and we affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“For these reasons, we dismiss in part, and deny in part, Hernandez-Nolasco’s petitions for review. PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART”
“For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice the plaintiffs’ complaint against the City. AFFIRMED”
“For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“In sum, we conclude that Cantillano Cruz established that any past persecution by Avila was ‘on account of’ her membership in the nuclear family of Martinez. We therefore grant Cantillano Cruz’s petition for review, reverse the BIA’s determination that she failed to meet the statutory nexus requirement, and remand the case to the BIA for further proceedings regarding Cantillano Cruz’s requests for relief from removal. PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS”
“For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED”
“For these reasons, we deny Uribe’s petition for review. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED”
Draft for Judge Keenan with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Keenan, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Keenan's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace