Gregory A. Presnell
How Judge Presnell rules, drawn from 31 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Presnell
Gregory A. Presnell is a judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Presnell received a commission on July 31, 2000. Judge Presnell assumed senior status on April 1, 2012.
Judge Presnell's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Presnell, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
File sentencing motions and memoranda at least three business days before the hearing absent extraordinary circumstances.
“Absent extraordinary circumstances, the court will not consider motions or memoranda filed less than three business days before a sentencing hearing.”
Conferences
Complete mediation in most civil cases six months before the trial term.
“Mediation is required in most civil cases and should be completed six months before the trial term.”
Trial
Electronically file one color-coded copy of each designated deposition transcript at least five days before trial and give the court a paper copy.
“At least five days before trial, the parties must electronically file with the court a single color-coded copy of each deposition transcript reflecting, in different highlighted colors, the deposition excerpts each party has designated to be read at trial with objections noted in the margin.”
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 10, 2026).
How Judge Presnell decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Frias, Presnell granted summary judgment on all counts for the sheriff in his official capacity, while preserving two claims against Cavis and granting judgment on a third.
“it is ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 42) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. In regards to Defendant Jerry L. Demings, in his capacity as Sheriff of Orange County, Florida, Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to all Counts in the Amended Complaint; 2. In regards to Defendant Gerald Cavis, Summary Judgement is DENIED as to Counts I and II, but GRANTED as to Count III.”
In insurance disputes, personal jurisdiction must rest on the defendant's purposeful forum contacts rather than the insured's unilateral decision to bring damaged property into Florida. In SMB Capital, an inspection and claim handling that reacted to the aircraft's presence did not establish jurisdiction over Canadian insurers whose policies and business were centered elsewhere.
“Plaintiffs’ reliance on Defendants’ isolated, reactive contact to their own presence in Florida is insufficient to support personal jurisdiction.”
In Blackwall Group v. Sick Boy, he denied a preliminary injunction because questions about whether a bar was affiliated with a clothing company did not establish actual consumer confusion or a likelihood of success on the trademark claim.
“the very fact that individuals were asking the question could suggest the opposite conclusion — i.e., that they had not been misled into believing the businesses were affiliated.”
In Arrington v. Walgreen Co., he rejected Walgreens’ argument that filling a valid prescription exactly as written necessarily satisfied the pharmacist’s duty of care when the complaint alleged the pharmacy knew of the patient’s drug allergy.
“Walgreens would have this Court interpret a pharmacist’s duty to use ‘due and proper care in filling the prescription’ as being satisfied by a robotic compliance with the instructions of the prescribing physician.”
In consent-judgment insurance litigation, requires the claimant to establish policy coverage before reaching wrongful refusal to defend or settlement reasonableness. The agreement cannot create coverage for an excluded loss.
“The determination of coverage is a condition precedent to any recovery against an insurer pursuant to a Coblentz agreement.”
Procedural preferences
In S.S., Presnell granted summary judgment on Count I and directed entry of judgment for the defendant on that claim.
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I (Doc. 36) is GRANTED; ... The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant on Count I”
In Continental Insurance, Presnell confirmed and adopted an unobjected magistrate recommendation.
“No objections have been filed. Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order.”
For compromised FLSA settlements, asks the parties to agree on the employee's recovery before negotiating counsel's fee and to disclose that sequence. This separates the worker's recovery from counsel's economic interest without automatically redoing the fee bargain.
“the best way to insure that no conflict has tainted the settlement is for the parties to reach agreement as to the plaintiffs recovery before the fees of the plaintiffs counsel are considered.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“it is ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 42) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. In regards to Defendant Jerry L. Demings, in his capacity as Sheriff of Orange County, Florida, Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to all Counts in the Amended Complaint; 2. In regards to Defendant Gerald Cavis, Summary Judgement is DENIED as to Counts I and II, but GRANTED as to Count III.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I (Doc. 36) is GRANTED; ... The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant on Count I”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Count II (Doc. 36) is GRANTED; ... Count II is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
Confronted with counsel who could not agree on where to hold a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, which Presnell called 'the latest in a series of Gordian knots that the parties have been unable to untangle without enlisting the assistance of the federal courts,' he denied the motion and directed the lawyers to settle the question by a single game of rock-paper-scissors. He offered an appeal hearing if either side disputed the game's outcome. The order illustrates his impatience with attorney gamesmanship over routine discovery logistics.
“The Plaintiff's Amended Motion and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of its Renewed Motion for Entry of Default Judgment is GRANTED IN PART.”
“The Supplemental Motion for Attorney's Fees and Additional Interest is GRANTED IN PART.”
“Defendants’ Amended Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 49) is hereby GRANTED;”
“Defendants’ Alternative Motion to Stay is DENIED as moot;”
“Plaintiffs’ (duplicative) Motion to Stay (Doc. 77) is hereby DENIED as moot.”
“ORDERED that the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 10) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff-Counterdefendant Inter-tape Polymer Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 43) is GRANTED;”
The court articulated a procedure for reviewing compromised FLSA settlements: the parties should disclose the compromise's basis and confirm that attorney fees were negotiated separately from the employee's recovery. Because the filing omitted that representation, the court required an amended joint motion without classifying the settlement motion's outcome.
“Plaintiff Melissa J. Sinni’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 51) is DENIED”
“Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 53) is GRANTED.”
“the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Counts II, III and IV are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the motion is DENIED.”
“Progressive’s Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doe. 103) is GRANTED”
“Maronda’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 90) is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled civil cases provide illustrative caseload context rather than weighted counts. No authoritative caseload baseline was available.
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 | 1 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 1 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 2 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, not for Judge Presnell: 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 | 6,896 | 5.5 months |
| Closed with no court action | 49 | 3.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,492 | 5.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 319 | 14.7 months |
| Closed during trial | 36 | 24.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 6,896 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,115 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 6,777 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 6,781 | 6.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 6,749 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 6,392 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 6,830 | 5.7 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 Presnell with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Presnell, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Presnell's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace