Kurt Damian Engelhardt
How Judge Engelhardt rules, drawn from 40 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Engelhardt decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
For the exclusionary rule, focuses on law-enforcement culpability and applies the good-faith exception even when a warrant is challenged as void from the outset.
“For the reasons set forth herein, we now join each of those circuits in holding that the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule set forth in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), applies to save the fruits of the warrant at issue from suppression.”
Treats the Fair Housing Act's robust-causation requirement as a meaningful limit that demands more than a statistical disparity.
“A careful review of the Supreme Court’s analysis in ICP, moreover, reveals its modification of HUD’s test to be both purposeful and significant.”
At the indictment stage, distinguishes a scheme to obtain followers' money through deceptive trading posts from a claim based only on withholding useful economic information.
“Defendants concede that the indictment adequately alleges deception. But they contend that the indictment does not allege a scheme to defraud nor an intent to defraud. In their view, the indictment merely alleges that they intended to deprive their followers of valuable economic information (not money or property) to enrich themselves (not injure their followers). In light of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Ciminelli and Kousisis, we disagree.”
Procedural preferences
When qualified immunity cannot be resolved on the pleadings, confines discovery to the facts needed to decide that defense.
“The district court is directed to limit discovery to uncover only the facts necessary to rule on qualified immunity.”
Cautions
For the Federal Tort Claims Act's discretionary-function exception, asks whether the challenged decision was susceptible to policy analysis, not whether the officer actually performed one.
“The proper inquiry under prong two is not whether [the agent] in fact engaged in a policy analysis when reaching his decision but instead whether his decision was susceptible to policy analysis.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the district court's application of the sophisticated means enhancement was not clearly erroneous. ... CONCLUSION AFFIRMED.”
“Accordingly, we hold that the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule is applicable to the NIT warrant and its fruits and, therefore, AFFIRM the district court's denial of Ganzer's motion to suppress.”
“For the aforementioned reasons, this court AFFIRMS the decision of the district court.”
“Because the district court's decision on the Rule 12(b)(6) motion was based on timing rather than a substantive legal disposition regarding qualified immunity, this court does not have jurisdiction to consider the appeal at this time. ... We DISMISS this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.”
“we find no error in the district court's determination that the allegations of ICP's complaint regarding Lincoln's and the Owners' ‘no vouchers’ policies fail to allege facts sufficient to provide the robust causation necessary for an actionable disparate impact claim.”
“Finding plain error in the district court's offense level calculation, we VACATE Randall's sentence and REMAND for re-sentencing consistent with this opinion.”
“having reviewed the district court's clearly-articulated reasons for denying Chambliss' motion to reduce his sentence, we find no abuse of discretion... Accordingly, we AFFIRM.”
“Johnson has failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for the error, he would have received a lesser sentence... AFFIRMED.”
“Tapia has not carried his burden of proving that he would have received a lesser sentence had the Government not referenced the proffer information; consequently, his substantial rights were not affected. AFFIRMED.”
“the district court did not err in its imposition of the sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2L1.1(b)(6). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”
“it was not erroneous for the district court to conclude that the claim numbers qualified as 'means of identification,' and that Kalu's offense thus warranted the two-level enhancement... AFFIRMED.”
“The district court did not err in assessing a $5,000 monetary penalty under the AVAA, no discrepancy exists between the orally pronounced assessment and the written judgment, and the district court did not err by denying a downward variance... AFFIRMED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled dockets of Engelhardt's E.D. La. cases are dominated by miscellaneous proceedings (grand-jury, search-warrant, and administrative matters), reflecting what the record happens to hold rather than his true civil-criminal mix; do not read the sample as a caseload distribution.
Draft for Judge Engelhardt with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Engelhardt, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Engelhardt's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace