Thomas G. Wilson
How Judge Wilson rules, drawn from 13 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Wilson
Thomas G. Wilson is a recalled United States Magistrate Judge for the Middle District of Florida in the Tampa Division. He was originally appointed in April 1979 and retired before returning to judicial service on recall. He earned his law degree from Duke University and previously worked as a federal judicial law clerk and a Justice Department attorney.
Judge Wilson's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Wilson, 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
For a clerk’s default, provide a memorandum explaining how service occurred and why it was legally valid.
“When filing motions requesting that the Clerk enter default, parties must provide a memorandum of law that sets forth how service was effectuated and, further, a legal basis that service was valid and proper.”
Motions
Put material from exhibits that the court should consider into the motion memorandum itself; referencing the exhibits cannot evade the 25-page limit.
“When filing motions, the parties are advised that they may not evade the 25-page limit by referencing exhibits without specifying in the motion the pertinent information in the attached exhibits.”
Discovery
For a Rule 36 or 37 motion to compel, quote each disputed request and response in full, followed by the reason relief is warranted.
“A motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 36 or Rule 37, Fed. R. Civ. P., shall include quotation in full of each interrogatory, question on deposition, request for admission, or request for production to which the motion is addressed; each of which shall be followed immediately by quotation in full of the objection and grounds therefor as stated by the opposing party, or the answer or response which is asserted to be insufficient; immediately followed by a statement of the reason the motion should be granted.”
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 Wilson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Bruno v. Commissioner of Social Security, Wilson affirmed the denial of benefits after finding that the ALJ addressed the claimant’s mental limitations and vision evidence. He applied substantial-evidence review to the administrative findings rather than deciding the facts anew.
“It is, moreover, the function of the Commissioner, and not the courts, to resolve conflicts in the evidence and to assess the credibility of the witnesses.”
In Marrero v. Commissioner of Social Security, Wilson reversed a child benefits denial because the administrative law judge inadequately evaluated two consulting psychologists' opinions and did not explain the connection between the evidence and a finding of a less than marked attention limitation.
“The ALJ erred by failing to create a 'logical bridge' between the evidence and his conclusion that the child has a 'less than marked' limitation in the functional domain of attending and competing tasks. Both arguments are meritorious.”
In Russo v. Commissioner of Social Security, Wilson recommended reversal because substantial evidence did not support the ALJ’s finding that skills from Russo’s past work transferred to jobs available in significant numbers. The district court adopted the recommendation.
“Because substantial evidence does not support the finding that the plaintiff acquired work skills from past relevant work that are transferable to other jobs available in significant numbers in the national economy, I recommend that the decision be reversed, and the matter remanded for further consideration.”
In Miranda v. Apollo Advanced Home Health, Wilson approved an FLSA settlement awarding $1,500 in unpaid wages, $1,500 in liquidated damages, and a separately negotiated $9,000 attorney fee. He found the fee facially reasonable despite the absence of time sheets.
“As to the attorney’s fee, the plaintiff did not provide time sheets detailing counsel’s time or the hourly rate. This lack of information, however, does not undermine the Court’s ability to evaluate the reasonableness of the parties’ settlement, as I do not find the amount of the attorney’s fee to be unreasonable on its face.”
Procedural preferences
In Howard v. Commissioner of Social Security, Wilson granted the Commissioner’s unopposed motion to remand on August 19, 2024, three days after it was filed.
“ORDER granting 23 Motion of Entry of Judgment with Remand.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson on 8/19/2024.”
Cautions
In Bruno v. Commissioner of Social Security, Wilson rejected a challenge based on a later medical opinion because the claimant had not placed it in the Appeals Council record and had not shown that it related back to the insured period.
“Under those circumstances, the Appeals Council cannot be faulted for not considering the new evidence. Rather, the fault lies with the plaintiff.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Because the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence and contains no reversible error, the decision will be affirmed.”
“Because the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is not adequately explained, the decision will be reversed and the matter remanded for further consideration.”
“Because the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence and the plaintiff does not identify any reversible error, the decision will be affirmed.”
“Because the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence and does not contain reversible error, the decision will be affirmed.”
“Because the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence and the plaintiff does not identify any reversible error, the decision will be affirmed.”
“Because the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence and does not contain any reversible error, the decision will be affirmed.”
“ORDER granting 23 Motion of Entry of Judgment with Remand.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson on 8/19/2024.”
“Because substantial evidence does not support the finding that the plaintiff acquired work skills from past relevant work that are transferable to other jobs available in significant numbers in the national economy, I recommend that the decision be reversed, and the matter remanded for further consideration.”
“Because I find the parties' settlement agreement constitutes a fair and reasonable compromise of this dispute, the motion will be granted and the case will be dismissed with prejudice.”
“That argument fails because the law judge indicated the plaintiff could stand/walk for two hours at a time. ... Furthermore, in light of the Scheduling Order and Memorandum Requirements, any other argument is forfeited”
“Because the Commissioner's finding that the plaintiff experienced substantial post-operative improvement is inconsistent with his determination that the plaintiff's residual functional capacity did not change during the alleged disability period, the decision will be reversed and remanded for further consideration.”
“ORDER affirming the Commissioner's decision. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson on 2/18/2026.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 432 days (N = 9).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 146 days (N = 9).
- The reviewed docket is dominated by consent Social Security disability appeals, which Wilson decided to final judgment as the parties' agreed judge of record.
- It also includes referred or consent matters involving wage-and-hour, disability-access, contract, admiralty, and civil-rights disputes, plus criminal duty proceedings.
- Several pending Social Security cases were reassigned in July or August 2026, so the reviewed historical mix should not be read as a statement about future assignments.
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 Wilson: 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 Wilson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Wilson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Wilson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace