Jacques Loeb Wiener Jr.

How Judge Wiener rules, drawn from 34 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Position
circuit
Appointed by
George H. W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
1990-03-12
ABA rating
Unanimously Well Qualified
Education
Tulane University (B.A., 1956); Tulane University Law School (J.D., 1961, editor-in-chief of the law review, first in class)
Signed orders read
34

How Judge Wiener decides

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

What persuades

Treats maritime repair costs for physical damage as distinct from the open-ended economic losses barred by the Robins Dry Dock rule.

“A claim for the costs of repairing damage caused by an allision presents no such risk. Robins Dry Dock therefore does not bar XL’s claim as it relates to the $1.254 million in repair costs.”

For marine-insurance wreck-removal coverage, allows state law to supply the legal duty that would compel a reasonable vessel owner to remove a wreck.

“State law thus supplements the universe of theories of liability that may compel a reasonable vessel owner to remove a wreck.”

A compulsory-attendance elementary school may have a special relationship with a very young child when it affirmatively places her in the sole custody of an unauthorized adult during school hours.

“We hold today that the alleged facts do indeed make out a violation of Jane’s substantive due-process rights by virtue of the School’s special relationship with her.”

The post-2016 distribution enhancement for peer-to-peer files requires knowledge that others can access the files; the reviewed record established that knowledge.

“The record here shows that Lawrence knew that others online could access his child pornography files. We therefore affirm his sentence”

Removing a firearm’s metal serial-number plate materially changes the number’s accessibility and therefore counts as altering or obliterating it for the guideline enhancement.

“Removal of the metal serial-number plate thus alters or obliterates the serial number under Guideline § 2K2.1(b)(4).”

Procedural preferences

Requires the trial court to apply the relevant excusable-neglect factors before denying Rule 60(b) relief for a lawyer's failure to retain local counsel.

“Because the district court did not consider the relevant factors in determining whether Deras’s failure to retain local counsel fell within the meaning of ‘excusable neglect,’ it abused its discretion in denying Deras’s Rule 60(b) motions.”

Permits amendment when the policy language may support plausible third-party-beneficiary facts and the trial court relied on inapposite authority to find amendment futile.

“The district court, by relying on inapposite case law, abused its discretion in denying Williams’s request to amend her complaint to plead such facts.”

Deference to labor arbitration ends when an award conflicts with the collective-bargaining agreement’s plain language and is not an arguable construction of the contract.

“We hold that the arbitration award conflicts with the plain language of the CBA. It was not an arguable construction of the CBA and instead amounted to the arbitrator’s own brand of industrial justice.”

Cautions

Enforces an express statutory channel for reviewing credit-union enforcement proceedings and rejects attempts to halt the agency action in district court.

“We must conclude that § 1786 explicitly precludes district court jurisdiction to ‘affect by injunction or otherwise the issuance or enforcement of’ the NCUA’s ‘notice or order’ in its administrative enforcement action against Moats.”

In a separate writing, he would have denied preliminary relief on the Board-member-removal issue because the employers did not prove irreparable harm from that issue specifically.

“Because the Employers have failed to prove that they would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction for that specific issue, I would instead reverse the district court’s decision granting injunctive relief.”

Signed rulings

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

Congious v. Shaw (Wiener, J., concurring in the judgment)
25-10886 · 2026-03-27
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“On this basis, I CONCUR in the judgment only.”

Deras v. Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc.
25-10977 · 2026-03-10
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“Accordingly, we VACATE the district court’s denials of Deras’s Rule 60(b) motions and REMAND for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.”

United States v. Glover-Wing
24-30431 · 2025-12-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is AFFIRMED.”

Moats v. National Credit Union Administration Board
24-40259 · 2025-09-23
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Ortega v. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
23-60617 · 2025-09-08
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“The petition for review is DENIED.”

Burgess v. Whang
22-11172 · 2025-08-25
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“We REVERSE the grant of the preliminary injunction and REMAND with instructions to DISMISS for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

Space Exploration Technologies Corp. v. NLRB (Wiener, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)
24-50627 consolidated with 24-40533 and 24-10855 · 2025-08-19
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“While I concur in most of the majority opinion’s holdings, I write separately to dissent from its holding that the Employers are entitled to a preliminary injunction regarding the removability of NLRB board members. Because the Employers have failed to prove that they would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction for that specific issue, I would instead reverse the district court’s decision granting injunctive relief.”

Scham v. District Courts Trying Criminal Cases, Harris County, Texas
97-20412 · 1998-08-07
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Finding that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying fees, we affirm.”

Anderson v. Canton Municipal Separate School District
99-60846 · 2000-11-06
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Therefore, the judgment of that court is, in all respects, AFFIRMED.”

Adam J. ex rel. Robert J. v. Keller Independent School District
02-11032 · 2003-05-02
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For the following reasons, we affirm.”

Communication Workers of America v. Ector County Hospital District
03-51224 · 2004-12-01
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The Hospital now appeals ... We affirm.”

Salge v. Edna Independent School District
04-40887 · 2005-05-27
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Defendant-Appellant Edna Independent School District (‘EISD’) appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of former employee Charlene Salge on her First Amendment retaliation claim. We affirm.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Circuit judges do not carry a federal trial caseload; not enumerated. Wiener had no prior judicial service before his 1990 appointment (private practice only).

Draft for Judge Wiener with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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