Lawrence K. Karlton

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California district Retired 2015 · served 1979–2015 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 10 signed orders read

Judge Karlton no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Karlton decides

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

What persuades

Applies the same granular approach at summary judgment, granting a defendant's motion in part while expressly preserving specific causes of action and a punitive-damages claim for trial.

“defendants Courson, Cassell, and Fuchs' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART. It is DENIED as to plaintiffs' second and third causes of action and prayer for punitive damages, to the extent provided herein.”

Procedural preferences

Adopts a magistrate judge's recommendation on de novo review and splits a motion to dismiss claim by claim, dismissing some defendants or theories while letting others proceed, rather than granting or denying wholesale.

“Defendants' January 18, 2008 (Docket # 21), motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part”

Signed rulings

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

Meyer v. Schwarzenegger
2:06-cv-02584 · 2008-07-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' January 18, 2008 (Docket # 21), motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's motion for a TRO/preliminary injunctive relief, filed on February 11, 2008 (Docket # 24), is denied.”

Gelow v. Central Pacific Mortgage Corp.
2:07-cv-01988 · 2009-08-28
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“defendants Courson, Cassell, and Fuchs' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART. It is DENIED as to plaintiffs' second and third causes of action and prayer for punitive damages, to the extent provided herein.”

Hat World, Inc. v. Kelly
2:12-cv-01591 · 2012-08-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant's motion to dismiss, ECF No. 35, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, ECF No. 7, is DENIED.”

In re SK Foods, L.P. (Sharp v. SSC Farms 1, LLC)
2:10-cv-01493 · 2010-12-09
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant) Granted

“the court REVERSES the decision of the Bankruptcy Court denying Appellants motion to stay as described above.”

Motions to dismiss (appellee) Denied

“the Trustee's motion to dismiss is DENIED”

Motions to strike (appellee) Granted

“the Trustee's motion to strike is GRANTED.”

Williams v. Ferguson
2:04-cv-00998 · 2006-09-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' November 14, 2005 motion for summary judgment is granted.”

Carmony v. County of Sacramento
2:05-cv-01679 · 2008-06-16
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's October 22, 2007, summary judgment motion is denied;”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' July 20, 2007, summary judgment motion is denied as to the following claims: ... Defendants' July 20, 2007, summary judgment motion is granted in all other respects.”

Hellon v. Felker
2:07-cv-01816 · 2009-04-02
Motions to dismiss (respondent) Denied

“Respondents' December 17, 2007, motion to dismiss this action as untimely is denied;”

Smith v. Stovall
2:08-cv-02492 · 2010-03-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' August 20, 2009 motion to dismiss is granted in part”

Burch v. California Department of Motor Vehicles
2:13-cv-01283 · 2013-12-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant's motion to dismiss the First Claim (federal employment discrimination claim) is DENIED; ... Defendant's motion to dismiss the Fourth Claim is GRANTED with leave to amend”

Motions to strike (defendant) Denied

“Defendant's motion to strike is DENIED”

Andreotti v. Andreotti
2:05-cv-00747 · 2005-08-03
Motion to withdraw reference (defendant) Granted

“The motion to withdraw reference is GRANTED;”

Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“The motion to remand the suit removed from the Superior is GRANTED;”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

A high-volume Sacramento-division civil mix typical of an Eastern District senior judge: a large share of pro se prisoner civil-rights (Section 1983) and state-prisoner habeas petitions referred to magistrate judges for findings and recommendations, alongside consumer-finance and mortgage-foreclosure removals, ADA access suits, employment and wage-and-hour matters, and assorted contract, trademark, and civil-forfeiture cases. On the prisoner and habeas side most of his dispositive work takes the form of adopting or rejecting a magistrate judge's recommendation; the counseled civil cases more often produce his own signed orders on motions to strike, to certify or approve class settlements, for injunctive relief, and to enforce judgments.

A historical record

Judge Karlton no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.