Daniel E. Butcher
How Judge Butcher rules, drawn from 13 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Butcher decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On a partial Rule 12(b)(6) motion he recommends granting in part, dismissing state-law tort claims without leave where the plaintiff failed to comply with the California Government Claims Act and the limitations period lapsed, while denying as moot other portions.
“The R&R advises the Court to grant Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's state law claims ... and deny as moot Defendant's motion to dismiss the official capacity claims. ... the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections ... ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety ... and GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendants' partial motion to dismiss”
In one subpoena dispute, Judge Butcher required counsel to meet and confer by video before seeking court intervention and denied the existing motion without prejudice so a compliant joint discovery statement could replace it.
“Under no circumstances may counsel satisfy the ‘meet and confer’ obligation by written correspondence alone.”
In approving one minor's compromise, Judge Butcher independently reviewed the net recovery, costs, annuity, and fee request, and accepted a contingency fee above the usual benchmark after considering the complexity and work performed.
“The Court finds counsel expended significant time and resources to obtain a favorable result for Plaintiff E.C.”
A change of counsel does not by itself justify reopening discovery; in Cuebiq, he required the party to show diligence during the existing discovery period and held new counsel to prior representations that substitution would not delay the schedule.
“Substitution of counsel, however, does not establish good cause to extend existing deadlines.”
Cautions
Butcher recommends dismissing a 28 U.S.C. 2254 petition as time-barred under AEDPA where the limitations period expired and there is no statutory or equitable tolling and no new evidence to invoke the Schlup actual-innocence gateway.
“Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends GRANTING Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. No. 11.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The R&R advises the Court to grant Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's state law claims ... and deny as moot Defendant's motion to dismiss the official capacity claims. ... the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections ... ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety ... and GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendants' partial motion to dismiss”
“Magistrate Judge Daniel E. Butcher's Report and Recommendation (‘R&R,’ ECF No. 12) advising the Court to deny the Petition ... the Court ... ADOPTS the R&R's conclusions ... DENIES the Petition ... DENIES a Certificate of Appealability.”
“Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends GRANTING Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. No. 11.”
“Judge Butcher recommends rejecting Atta's Strickland arguments on all grounds except one: that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to consult a forensic pathologist, which prejudiced Atta's defense. ... The Court now OVERRULES Atta's objections to the R&R; SUSTAINS the Government's objection to that portion of the R&R that recommends finding Atta's defense was prejudiced by counsel's ineffective performance; and ADOPTS IN PART AND REJECTS IN PART the R&R.”
“the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, REVERSES the Commissioner's decision pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and REMANDS for the calculation and award of benefits.”
Order granting IFP and screening the complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B); no party motion ruled on.
“The Court finds no clear error in the R&R. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R and GRANTS Defendant’s Motion.”
“Accordingly, the Court DENIES without prejudice Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel. Dkt. No. 1.”
“For the reasons discussed above, the Court APPROVES the settlement agreement and GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion to confirm Plaintiff E.C.’s minor’s compromise. Dkt. No. 74.”
“IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the Court issue an Order as follows: (1) approving and adopting this Report and Recommendation; and (2) DENYING Defendant Obler’s Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. No. 33.”
“The undersigned, therefore, recommends denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss at Docket No. 3 as moot.”
“the undersigned recommends GRANTING the County’s Motion (Dkt. No. 8) with leave for Plaintiff to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against the County and Sheriff Martinez.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Fish Attorneys’ Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. Dkt. No. 127.”
Draft for Judge Butcher with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Butcher, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Butcher's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace