Lavenski Roy Smith
How Judge Smith rules, drawn from 41 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Smith decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
For pre-enforcement religious-freedom claims, treats standing and ripeness as satisfied when the challenged federal interpretations create a credible threat of enforcement.
“Because we have already held that the plaintiffs have standing to challenge HHS’s interpretation of Section 1557 and the EEOC’s interpretation of Title VII, we necessarily hold that their claims are ripe for judicial review.”
At sentencing, keeps the burden on the government to justify special supervised-release conditions rather than requiring the defendant to disprove unsupported allegations.
“Third, the district court impermissibly shifted the burden of proof from the government to Sutton. Our court has held that ‘the government bears the burden to justify a condition of supervised release.’”
At the pleading stage of a force case, Smith accepted the complaint except where video conclusively contradicted it. Ambiguous footage showing a possible arm movement did not establish resistance strongly enough to overcome allegations that officers used an unannounced takedown.
“the video does not blatantly contradict Young’s allegations, nor does it conclusively support the officers’ argument that Young resisted.”
In an oil-and-gas royalty case, Smith read the pooling statute and lease together rather than treating the statute as permission to disregard the parties' bargain. A working-interest owner remained obliged to calculate the statutory royalty consistently with the lease's terms.
“§ 15-72-305 never relieved a working interest owner’s obligation under a lease. The 1/8 royalty was always required to be paid according to the lease.”
Procedural preferences
On interlocutory qualified-immunity appeals, stops at the jurisdictional threshold when the trial court's assumed factual record remains disputed.
“Because the factual record—as assumed by the district court—is unsettled and disputed, we lack jurisdiction to go further.”
Requires record evidence for sentencing findings and rejects an upward variance when the asserted intended distribution location rests on insufficient proof.
“We conclude that sufficient evidence is lacking to support the court’s fact finding.”
Smith treated the removal clock as triggered when the defendants could unambiguously ascertain federal jurisdiction, even though they relied on a stipulation and chose to remain in state court. Once the right is clear, later strategic developments do not restart or cancel the statutory deadline.
“the PBMs failed to timely remove after clearly ascertaining that removal was available to them following the County’s service of its February 14, 2022 Red Flag Analysis.”
Intervention in a mature case must be timely whether sought as of right or by permission; long-known litigation and unexplained delay weigh strongly against reopening a completed settlement.
“Whether a person moves for ‘intervention of right’ or for ‘permissive intervention,’ the motion must be timely.”
Cautions
In a separate Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act writing, cautioned against extending the commercial-activity exception where the alleged domestic effects were attenuated and implicated diplomatic concerns.
“Immunity for foreign states under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, while not impenetrable, is quite stout and stronger than the claim alleged in this case. It is certainly not strong enough to justify judicial intervention into an arena well populated with substantial political and diplomatic concerns.”
Smith vacated a prison term selected to make the defendant eligible for treatment. A sentencing court may discuss rehabilitation, but it cannot lengthen imprisonment to promote or secure participation in a prison program.
“the record makes clear that the district court calculated its sentence based on the need for rehabilitation, and its decision was not otherwise supported by the § 3553(a) factors.”
In a software-contract dispute between sophisticated parties, Smith enforced a negotiated limitation of liability where the claimant had been paid for the work actually completed and the restriction preserved the agreement's essential purpose. A challenge should identify the uncompensated core performance, not just the unavailable expected profits.
“Assuming without deciding that the UCC would apply to this contract, the limitation-of-liability clause does not cause the Lease Agreement to fail of its essential purpose.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Because the Village ordinance is content neutral, has been narrowly tailored to serve the Village's significant governmental interests, leaves ample alternatives for Havlak to communicate her message, and does not provide the Village with unbridled discretion, we find the permit process survives Havlak's challenge.”
“On appeal, HHS and the EEOC (collectively, ‘the government’) challenge the district court's grant of declaratory and permanent injunctive relief to the plaintiffs, arguing that the district court erred in determining ‘that plaintiffs had demonstrated standing, ripeness, and imminent irreparable injury sufficient to justify permanent injunctive relief.’ Appellants' Br. at ii. We affirm.”
“We affirm the district court, but we modify Henderson's revocation judgment to reflect accurately that he violated only special conditions 8 and 9 of his supervised release.”
“Judge Newsham's handling of King's case does not present a final policy or custom that can give rise to a § 1983 action. Because King failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the district court's dismissal of the action was proper.”
“I concur in all but Part III.B.2 of the court's opinion. I would affirm the district court's dismissal of the hoarding claim. I conclude that China's behavior lacks ‘a direct effect in the United States.’ 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2).”
“James Thomas appeals his nine-month sentence imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. We affirm.”
“The record sufficiently supports the jury's finding that Fisher had knowledge of his prohibited status. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”
“Because the district court applied a lower standard of proof, found facts that are not supported by the sentencing record and are not judicially noticeable, and impermissibly shifted the government's burden of proof to Sutton, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion. The sex-offender-related special conditions that Sutton appeals are vacated, and the case is remanded.”
“Rodney Dale Smith appeals his sentence of 37 months' imprisonment, arguing that the district court plainly erred by fashioning the length of his sentence to provide rehabilitation opportunities, in violation of Tapia v. United States, 564 U.S. 319 (2011). We agree and reverse.”
“We conclude that the PBMs unambiguously and unequivocally ascertained that the February 14, 2022 Red Flag Analysis allowed removal of the case. ... Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order to remand the case to the state court.”
“We conclude that the government did not breach the plea agreement. ... The district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence.”
“The plaintiffs lack Article III standing to bring their claims. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment and remand with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Circuit judges do not carry a trial caseload; not enumerated.
Draft for Judge Smith with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Smith, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Smith's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace