Jeffrey Alker Meyer

How Judge Meyer rules, drawn from 9 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the District of Connecticut
Position
District judge
Status
Deceased
Served
2014–2025
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
February 25, 2014
ABA rating
Well Qualified
Education
B.A., Yale College, 1985 (summa cum laude); J.D., Yale Law School, 1989
Signed orders read
9

About Judge Meyer

Jeffrey Alker Meyer was a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Meyer received a commission on February 25, 2014. Judge Meyer served until death on January 12, 2025.

How Judge Meyer decides

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

What persuades

In Callahan's employment suit, he denied the defendants' summary-judgment motion because her affidavit disputed their account of the termination and absences, leaving genuine fact issues.

“because Callahan has properly disputed both assertions, I must deny the defendants' motion for summary judgment.”

In Moore’s employment suit, he granted reconsideration in part, dismissing the equal-protection retaliation claim while leaving the Title VII retaliation claim for further proceedings.

“defendants' motion for reconsideration (Doc. #83) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion, and summary judgment, is GRANTED dismissing plaintiff's Equal Protection claim for retaliation against defendant Callahan, but DENIED as to plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim”

Procedural preferences

In Duarte’s suit, he dismissed the state CFEPA claims without prejudice while allowing the federal claims to proceed.

“defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. #22) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's CFEPA claims (Counts Five and Six) are dismissed without prejudice ... This case will otherwise proceed with respect to plaintiff's federal law claims (Counts One through Four).”

Signed rulings

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

Callahan v. Hackling
3:19-cv-01679-JAM · 2024-09-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“because Callahan has properly disputed both assertions, I must deny the defendants' motion for summary judgment. ... the Court DENIES the defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. #119).”

Duarte v. Western Connecticut Health Network
3:16-cv-01757-JAM · 2017-07-11
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. #22) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's CFEPA claims (Counts Five and Six) are dismissed without prejudice ... This case will otherwise proceed with respect to plaintiff's federal law claims (Counts One through Four).”

Moore v. Connecticut Department of Correction
3:13-cv-01160-JAM · 2018-03-22
Motion for reconsideration (defendant) Granted in part

“defendants' motion for reconsideration (Doc. #83) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion, and summary judgment, is GRANTED dismissing plaintiff's Equal Protection claim for retaliation against defendant Callahan, but DENIED as to plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim against the DOC.”

Brown v. Inland Properties LLC
3:17-cv-01157-JAM · 2018-07-06
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. #25). The Clerk of Court shall close this case.”

Schipke v. State of Connecticut
3:17-cv-02087-JAM · 2018-09-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the motion to dismiss (Doc. #21) is GRANTED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall terminate Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Church as a defendant in this action.”

Patushi v. Digital Federal Credit Union
3:23-cv-01202-JAM · 2024-06-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS the defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. #14). ... without prejudice to Patushi's right to seek relief in state court or to file in this Court within 30 days an amended complaint”

Taveras v. XPO Last Mile, Inc.
3:15-cv-01550-JAM · 2016-09-12
Motion for interlocutory appeal certification (defendant) Denied

“Because XPO has not presented a controlling issue of law for interlocutory appeal, its motion for a certificate of appealability (Doc. #95) is DENIED.”

Lundstedt v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
3:13-cv-01423-JAM · 2020-02-10
Post trial motion (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court DENIES plaintiff Lundstedt's post-trial motions (Docs. #364, #365, #367, #376).”

Flynn v. Verizon Wireless
3:22-cv-01065-JAM · 2022-12-12
Discovery stay (court) Granted

“the Court stays all third-party discovery pending its resolution of the pending motions to dismiss.”

Pending matters in the official report

Judge Meyer was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2024.

Motions pending more than six months4
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years14
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Sep 2024414
Mar 202457
Sep 2023712
Mar 2023813
Sep 2022012
Mar 202209
Sep 202107
Mar 2021810
Sep 202029

A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.

A historical record

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