Dorothy Wright Nelson

How Judge Nelson rules, drawn from 32 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Position
circuit
Status
Senior status
Appointed by
Jimmy Carter (Democratic)
Commissioned
1979-12-20
Education
University of California, Los Angeles, A.B., 1950; University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, J.D., 1953; University of Southern California Law School, LL.M., 1956
Signed orders read
32

How Judge Nelson decides

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

What persuades

Requires constitutionally adequate notice before a statutory foreclosure process can extinguish a recorded property interest.

“We hold that the Statute’s ‘opt-in’ notice scheme, which required a homeowners’ association to alert a mortgage lender that it intended to foreclose only if the lender had affirmatively requested notice, facially violated the lender’s constitutional due process rights”

Treats a meaningful contractual opportunity to opt out as important when assessing procedural unconscionability in arbitration agreements.

“the arbitration agreement at issue in this case allowed employees a meaningful choice not to participate in the program”

Applies intervening legal authority when it fundamentally changes the consequences of an earlier guilty plea.

“This fundamental change in the law operates as a ‘fair and just reason’ to allow Garcia-Lopez to withdraw his guilty plea.”

Procedural preferences

Uses concrete remedial deadlines when appellate delay itself violates due process.

“we therefore remand to the district court with instructions for it to enter an order directing the California Court of Appeal to hear his appeal within 90 days or release him”

Permits amendment when an intervening change in law reshapes the viable parties and theories, while requiring allegations to distinguish each defendant's conduct.

“On remand, plaintiffs must remove those defendants who are no longer amenable to suit under the ATS, and specify which potentially liable party is responsible for what culpable conduct.”

Cautions

A party seeking to change the capacity in which a defendant is sued must satisfy timely notice requirements.

“Because Eaglesmith did not serve Ward with new notice of the change in status within the statute of limitations, we hold that the district court properly denied Eaglesmith’s request for leave to amend the complaint.”

Signed rulings

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

Gilpin v. McCormick
· 1990-12-21
Appeal (habeas petitioner-appellant) Denied

“The district court’s summary judgment dismissal of Gilpin’s petition is hereby AFFIRMED.”

In re Neuton
· 1990-12-28
Appeal (debtor-appellant) Granted in part

“BAP ORDER TO REMAND AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATIONS.”

Coe v. Thurman
· 1991-02-15
Appeal (habeas petitioner-appellant) Granted

“We agree that the excessive delay in this case has violated his right to due process, and we therefore remand to the district court with instructions for it to enter an order directing the California Court of Appeal to hear his appeal within 90 days or release him.”

United States v. Mayfield
· 1999-08-26
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Granted

“We thus reverse and remand for a new trial.”

Eaglesmith v. Ward
· 1996-01-23
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

United States v. McNally
· 1998-11-09
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“For the reasons stated above, we affirm the district court’s sentence. AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Laerdal Manufacturing Corp.
· 1995-12-28
Appeal (defendants-appellants) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

Kees v. Wallenstein
· 1998-11-25
Appeal (plaintiffs-appellants) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Meanel v. Apfel
· 1999-04-05
Appeal (benefits claimant-appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the district court. AFFIRMED.”

Newman v. American Airlines, Inc.
· 1999-05-04
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Granted

“REVERSED AND REMANDED.”

Finnegan v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
· 1995-11-14
Petition for review (claimant-petitioner) Denied

“The order of the Benefits Review Board is AFFIRMED.”

In re Reed
· 1993-02-12
Appeal (debtor-appellant) Granted

“REVERSED.”

Draft for Judge Nelson with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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