Richard A. Lazzara
How Judge Lazzara rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Lazzara
Richard A. Lazzara is a judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Lazzara received a commission on September 29, 1997. Judge Lazzara assumed senior status on December 17, 2011.
Judge Lazzara's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Lazzara, 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
Email proposed orders on substantive motions instead of docketing them with the motion.
“Parties should email proposed orders on substantive motions and should not docket them with the motion on CM/ECF.”
Conferences
The court refers all cases to mediation four to six months before the trial term.
“The court refers all cases to mediation four to six months before the trial term.”
Trial
File trial briefs, proposed voir dire, proposed jury instructions, and special verdict forms five days before the trial term.
“Parties must file trial briefs, proposed voir dire questions, proposed jury instructions, and any special verdict forms five days before the trial term.”
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 Lazzara decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Buell v. Direct General Insurance Agency, Lazzara acknowledged that he had misapprehended his Erie obligation when analyzing a Florida private right of action. He revised the reasoning for dismissing the complaint while denying the plaintiffs' rehearing and amendment requests.
“the Court acknowledges that it misapprehended its obligation under Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins ... to divine the law of Florida as it exists today”
In Lucky Cousins Trucking v. QC Energy Resources, Lazzara denied a preliminary injunction enforcing restrictive covenants after the applicants failed to show a legitimate business interest through specific evidence of confidential information or other protected interests.
“Generic allegations do not establish a legitimate business interest”
Cautions
In Chandler v. Kopelousos, Lazzara denied most of the defendants’ dismissal arguments. The defendants took an interlocutory appeal; the court of appeals reversed and remanded, after which the district court dismissed the case and entered judgment for the defendants.
“OPINION/ORDER of USCA. REVERSED AND REMANDED as to 50 Notice of interlocutory appeal filed by Faneuil, Inc., 46 Notice of interlocutory appeal filed by Denise Garcia, Stephanie C. Kopelousos,”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, for the reasons expressed, it is ordered and adjudged as follows: 1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun, III (Dkt.301), is confirmed and approved in all respects and made a part of this order for all purposes, except as may be noted otherwise in this order. 2) The Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Class (Dkt.37), as supplemented (Dkt.187), is denied. 3) This case shall proceed on the claims of each individual Plaintiff. 4) Judge McCoun is requested to convene a status conference to consider the issues of disclosure of additional experts and their reports, the filing of motions addressed to the experts, the filing of dispositive motions, ruling on discovery motions deferred pending this Court's order on class certification, and any other matter he deems appropriate.”
“1. Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification (Dkt.89) is GRANTED.”
“3. The IMSG Defendants' Motion to Establish Class Period CuG-Off (Dkt.98) is denied without prejudice to refiling after further development of facts pertinent to the class period.”
“1. Defendant's Motion to Limit Scope of Review and Discovery (Dkt.13) is DENIED.”
“2. Defendant's Motion for Protective Order (Dkt.13) is DENIED.”
“It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration (Dkt. 10) is GRANTED. All proceedings in this case are stayed, and the Clerk is directed to administratively close this case pending the parties' completion of the arbitration process. The parties' shall report the outcome of the arbitration process to the Court within 10 days of its completion.”
“ACCORDINGLY, for the reasons expressed, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1) The Court's order of May 1, 2007, dismissing Plaintiffs' third amended complaint is modified to reflect that such dismissal is with prejudice as to all Plaintiffs without leave to file an amended complaint in their individual capacities in separate cases. 2) Plaintiffs' Motion for Rehearing and Leave to File Fourth Amended Complaint (Dkts. 59 & 60) are denied.”
“Defendant's Motion to Stay Action Pending Completion of Neutral Evaluation Process (Dkt. 6) is granted.”
“1. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint to Revoke Naturalization (Dkt. 16) is denied. 2. The Government's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15) is granted.”
“ACCORDINGLY, for the reasons expressed, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and Request for Leave to Submit Supplemental Briefings (Dkt. 94) is denied.”
“It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Admiral Insurance Company's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 30) is GRANTED and Meridian Construction and Development, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 35) is DENIED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for Defendant and against Plaintiff and to close this case.”
“It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Max Specialty Insurance Company's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment as to Eye in the Sky Pictures, Inc. (Dkt. 84) is GRANTED.”
“Defendant Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 65) is GRANTED. Plaintiff Culbreath Isles Property Owners Association, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 61), Plaintiff Florida Policyholders, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 63) and Plaintiff Orline M. Sidman's Motion for Summary Judgment are DENIED.”
“1. Claimant Grupo Arosfran Empreendimentos E Participacoes Sari's Motion to Dissolve Writ of Garnishment (Dkt. 1030) is GRANTED.”
“2. Claimant Golffate -Holdings (Angola) LDA's Motion to Dissolve Writ of Garnishment (Dkt. 1052) is GRANTED.”
“19. Plaintiffs'. Motions for TRIA Turnover Judgments (Dkts. 983, 984, 991, 992, and 993) are all DENIED AS MOOT inasmuch as they relate to Writs that, have now been dissolved due to the Court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“20. Claimants Kassim Tajideen, Grupo Arosffan Empreendimentos E Participacoes SARL, and Ovias Trading, S.A.'s Motion to Dissolve Writs of Garnishment (Dkt. 961) ... is DENIED AS MOOT”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 104.0 days (N = 2).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 1 days (N = 35).
The sampled six-week window produced forty-two civil assignments, a mix of insurance, consumer finance, employment, and civil rights matters typical of a Tampa docket.
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 | 0 |
| 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 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 Lazzara: 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 Lazzara with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lazzara, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lazzara's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace