Susan Cawthon Bucklew
How Judge Bucklew rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Bucklew
Susan C. Bucklew is a judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Bucklew received a commission on November 24, 1993. Judge Bucklew assumed senior status on August 1, 2008.
Judge Bucklew's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Bucklew, 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
Trial
File proposed jury instructions, verdict forms, and voir dire five days before jury selection, and email courtesy copies to chambers.
“Parties should file proposed jury instructions, verdict forms, and voir dire five days prior to jury selection, with courtesy copies emailed to Judge Bucklew's chambers.”
Trial
Electronically file exhibit and witness lists by the morning of trial and email WordPerfect courtesy copies to chambers.
“Parties must electronically file exhibit and witness lists by the morning of trial and must email courtesy copies in WordPerfect format (.wpd) to chambers.”
Trial
Provide the courtroom deputy a three-ring binder of properly marked exhibits.
“Parties must provide a three-ring binder with copies of all properly premarked exhibits to the courtroom deputy.”
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 Bucklew decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Daniel v. Navient Solutions, LLC, she denied dismissal of student-loan borrowers' claims because the alleged advisory relationship and benefit presented factual questions that could be tested after discovery.
“summary judgment, rather than a motion to dismiss, is the proper”
In Street v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., she granted summary judgment for the ERISA plan and administrator after applying the plan's any-occupation disability standard and finding no evidence of a structural conflict.
“failed to show that the decision was wrong and there is no conflict of interest.”
At summary judgment in a reduction-in-force age case, the court required evidence that the employer’s stated reasons for choosing the workers were pretextual.
“termination, Plaintiffs must point to evidence that shows that Defendant’s proffered reasons are”
Cautions
For claims subject to heightened pleading, state the underlying misconduct, the defendant's knowledge, and the assistance provided; absolute detail is unnecessary when facts remain in defendants' exclusive control.
“[A]bsolute particularity is not required, especially when some matters are beyond”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants Suarez and TPL’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 14) is DENIED.”
“Wasserman’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 17) is DENIED.”
“The Postmaster General’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 31) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: (1)As to Count I, the discrimination claim, summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as described in this Order. (2) As to Count II, the retaliation claim, summary judgment is DENIED. (3) As to Count III, the FMLA claim, summary judgment is GRANTED in favor of the Defendant, United States Postmaster General John E. Potter, and against the Plaintiff, Wendy Johnson.”
“The Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (Doc. No. 83).”
“Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Auto-Owners Insurance Company (Doc. 472) is DENIED.”
“Therefore, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) is GRANTED.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 29) is DENIED.”
“Defendant’s Motion for Oral Argument (Doc. No. 31) on the Motion to Dismiss is also DENIED.”
“Auto-Owners’ motion, as corrected, for attorney’s fees and costs (Docs. 596, 601) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
“Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 36) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Navient Solutions, LLC’s Motion to Strike Class Allegations and to Dismiss (Doc. 28) is DENIED.”
“Company’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 44) and Defendants’ Southern Graphics, Inc., and SGS International, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint with Prejudice (Doc. 45) are DENIED.”
“Counterclaim-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim (Doc. No.24) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART”
“Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. No. 38) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 37) is GRANTED;”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 259 days (N = 10).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 3.5 days (N = 6).
The fixed-seed 2015 cohort ranged from post-conviction and contract matters resolved within days to employment and consumer cases lasting one to three years. The ten-case duration median was 259 days. This bounded cohort describes the sampled matters rather than the judge's full caseload.
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 Bucklew: 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 Bucklew with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Bucklew, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Bucklew's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace