Patricia C. Fawsett
How Judge Fawsett rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Fawsett decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Fawsett reads a discrimination pleading for the facts it actually alleges rather than the label attached to them; a bare recital that an impairment limited a major life activity is treated as a legal conclusion, but surrounding factual allegations can still support the claim on a perceived-impairment theory.
“McNa’s allegation that her anxiety and depression ‘substantially limited one or more major life activities’ is purely a legal conclusion. However, the facts alleged in her complaint are sufficient to infer that McNa’s supervisors, Bubb and Cox, perceived McNa as possessing a mental impairment that limited the major life activity of working.”
An argument that two counts are duplicative because they arise from the same termination will not carry a motion to dismiss; alternative theories built on one set of facts are expressly permitted.
“A common set of facts often form the basis for multiple causes of action.”
In patent disputes, Fawsett may grant summary judgment on some issues while preserving others rather than treating the dispute as all-or-nothing.
“the Second Motion for Summary by Voter Verified, Inc. (Doc. No. 106, filed Apr. 28, 2010) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
Fawsett enforces territorial exclusivity provisions at summary judgment when the contract and record establish a breach, while preserving unrelated claims that remain factually disputed.
“The Motion is GRANTED to the extent Defendant seeks summary judgment on breach of the exclusivity provision of the Los Angeles and Orange County Agreements in Counts III and IV. The Motion is DENIED in all other respects.”
Cautions
Plead each theory in its own count. A claim that appears only in the factual background, or is raised for the first time in a response brief, will not be recognized.
“to the extent McNa is asserting a procedural due process claim, she fails to meet the pleading requirements of Federal Rules of Procedure 8(a) and 10(b) which ‘require the pleader to present his claims discretely and succinctly, so that his adversary can discern what he is claiming and frame a responsive pleading.’”
A party seeking dismissal in favor of a foreign forum must establish an available alternative forum and overcome the strong presumption favoring a U.S. plaintiff's chosen federal forum.
“The Motion of Defendant Thrifty Rent-A-Car Service, Inc. to Dismiss and Motion to Join in the Pleadings of the Co-Defendant Toyota Motor Company (Doc. No. 14, filed Dec. 19, 2007) is DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Based on the foregoing it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss Count I of Plaintiffs Complaint and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Defendants Captain Katanna's, Inc. And Pineda Inn Bar and Grill, Inc. (Doc. No. 9, filed Apr. 17, 2013) is DENIED.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Motion for Summary Judgment (with Incorporated Memorandum of Law), filed by Defendants T.D. Williamson, Inc., TDW Services, Inc., and Bryan McDonald on December 29, 2006, (Doc. No. 101), and the Former Employees' Motion for Summary Judgment (with Incorporated Memorandum of Law), filed by Defendants Greg Foushi, Jose Delgado, Saul Ferrer, James Jackson, Robert John, Michael Mainelli, Rebecca Minervino, James Overstreet, Robert Schmidt, Nicole Turner, and John Foushi on December 29, 2006, (Doc. No. 102), are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“the Former Employees' Motion for Summary Judgment (with Incorporated Memorandum of Law), filed by Defendants Greg Foushi, Jose Delgado, Saul Ferrer, James Jackson, Robert John, Michael Mainelli, Rebecca Minervino, James Overstreet, Robert Schmidt, Nicole Turner, and John Foushi on December 29, 2006, (Doc. No. 102), are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“the Motion for Default Judgement and Memorandum of Law and Fact in Support Thereof by En-pat, Inc. (Doc. No. 16, filed Jan. 7, 2011) is GRANTED to the extent it seeks a finding that Defendant Budnic use of the JCM Modification Kit infringed and continues to infringe the '260 patent.”
“Defendant Green Thumb Landscaping, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 50).”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 37) is GRANTED with respect to Count IV and DENIED with respect to Counts I, II, III, V, VI.”
“1) Plaintiffs Access Now, Inc. and Edward Resnick's Motion to Certify Class (Doc. No. 31) is DENIED.”
“2) Defendants Walt Disney World Company, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, LLC, Walt Disney World Hospitality & Recreation Corporation and Lake Buena Vista Communities, Inc.'s Motion to Strike Class Allegations (Doc. No. 41) is GRANTED.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES the Motion of MLU Services, Inc. to Dismiss the Complaint or, in the Alternative, Motion to Strike and Memorandum of Law in Support (Doc. No. 13, filed Dec. 21, 2007).”
“The Motion of Defendants to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 21, filed Jan. 10, 2008) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Count IV is DISMISSED without prejudice. All other counts remain pending before the Court. Plaintiff has ten (10) days to submit a Third Amended Complaint which complies with this Order.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 29) of Defendant Universal City Development Partners, Ltd. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 59, filed February 7, 2008).”
“Based on the foregoing, the Defendant's Motion and Memorandum of Law to Dismiss the Complaint or Alternatively, to Stay the Federal Court Proceedings, filed by Defendant Champion Window Manufacturing and Supply Company, Inc. (‘CWMSC’) on April 9, 2007, (Doc. No. 12), is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 247 days (N = 20).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 46 days (N = 5).
The two bounded Orlando cohorts include wage-and-hour, employment-discrimination, civil-rights, Social Security, product-liability, foreclosure, insurance, copyright, and other statutory matters. The available entries are incomplete in several sampled cases, so this mix and the recorded outcomes describe only the twenty sampled matters.
Draft for Judge Fawsett with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Fawsett, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Fawsett's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace