Sarah F. Russell
How Judge Russell rules, drawn from 42 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Russell
Sarah French Russell is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Russell received a commission on November 26, 2024.
Judge Russell's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Russell, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
Do not file letter briefs or sur-reply briefs; use a formal motion for relief.
“Judge Russell does not allow letter briefs or sur-reply briefs. In lieu of filing a letter brief, a party should file a formal motion.”
Conferences
Use actual calendar dates in Rule 26(f) reports.
“Rule 26(f) Reports must include actual deadline dates, even if such deadlines are tied to earlier events in a case.”
Trial
File in limine motions with the joint trial memorandum.
“Judge Russell’s Joint Trial Memorandum Instructions require the parties to file motions in limine at the time the Joint Trial Memorandum is submitted.”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge Russell decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Sweetbridge Group v. Robinson & Cole, she read the agreement's non-referral sentence together with the preceding confidentiality clause and rejected an argument that treated the second sentence as a standalone prohibition.
“The sentence that follows, providing that R+C 'shall not refer or identify Firm to any other company or firm,' is not a standalone prohibition disconnected from the sentence that precedes it.”
In an overtime case, she declined to compel arbitration when the employee signed while on leave and never resumed work, and the clause obligated only the employee; neither continued work nor a mutual promise supplied consideration.
“arbitration clause cannot be read to bind Supported Living”
Procedural preferences
In Bajraktari, remanded a product liability case after finding the removing defendants had not met their demanding burden to prove the in-state seller was fraudulently joined.
“persuaded that Defendants have met the demanding burden of proving fraudulent joinder.”
In a defamation case, she denied dismissal because the defendants had not established that the plaintiffs were public figures at the pleading stage, leaving that issue open for a developed record.
“Because I cannot say at this juncture that Plaintiffs are public figures, the Motion to Dismiss is denied.”
Cautions
In Sweetbridge, Russell held that R+C’s statement was not defamatory merely because it did not repeat SBG’s contested allegation.
“R+C's statement is not rendered defamatory for declining to reiterate SBG's allegation that R+C breached the contract.”
In an at-will employment dispute, enforced a handbook disclaimer that was clear and prominently placed, rejecting contract and promissory-estoppel theories based on progressive-discipline language.
“The express disclaimer visible on the back of the Code of Business Conduct is no less clear.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“R+C's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and SBG's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“For these reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment as to all counts is GRANTED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is denied as to Count One (FMLA interference) and Count Two (FMLA retaliation). The Motion to Dismiss is granted as to all other causes of action. Counts Three and Four are dismissed without prejudice. Count Five is dismissed with prejudice because Plaintiff failed to contest dismissal of this count.”
“Hernaiz's pending motions, ECF Nos. 39, 40, 47, 48, 49, 51, 56, 57, and 62, are DENIED. Defendants' motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 46, is GRANTED.”
“For the same reasons, Hernaiz's motion for summary judgment on his retaliation claim must be denied.”
“Rignol's application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, ECF No. 16, is DENIED.”
“PSI Marine's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“CSAA's motion for summary judgment and motion to dismiss are hereby granted in their entirety. Declaratory judgment is hereby entered that CSAA has no obligation under the Homeowner's Policy or the Umbrella Policy to defend or indemnify Jason Yerushalmi”
“Yerushalmi's First Counterclaim for breach of contract has no arguable basis in fact or law, and his other Counterclaims ... are also not viable.”
“CSC's Motion to Dismiss Count Two of Rivera's Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) is denied.”
“I also grant both of Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment in their entirety.”
“I therefore grant summary judgment for those Defendants on Count One.”
“Defendants Stephanie’s and Jones’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 31, is DENIED”
“Defendant Acheampong’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 54, is DENIED”
Sua sponte remand for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction (Rooker-Feldman). This jurisdictional remand did not resolve a party motion.
“CSC’s Motion to Dismiss Count Two of Mandu’s Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) is denied.”
“I grant the Southington Defendants’ motion to dismiss Glossian’s Sixth Amended Complaint.”
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 18 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 5 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 12 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 18 | 12 |
| Sep 2025 | 18 | 10 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 10 |
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.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, not for Judge Russell: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 1,471 | 6.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 227 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 833 | 5.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 401 | 13.8 months |
| Closed during trial | 10 | 36.4 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,471 | 6.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,501 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 1,468 | 8.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,598 | 9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,456 | 8.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,683 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,877 | 9.2 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Russell with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Russell, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Russell's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace