William F. Jung
How Judge Jung rules, drawn from 42 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Jung
William Frederic Jung is a judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Jung received a commission on September 10, 2018.
Judge Jung's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Jung, 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
Filing
Provide a courtesy copy only when a motion exceeds 100 pages including exhibits and attachments.
“When filing motions electronically, it is not necessary to submit a courtesy copy to chambers unless the motion exceeds 100 pages in length, including exhibits and attachments.”
Motions
Without leave, reply briefs in civil and criminal cases may be no more than eight pages and must be filed within seven days.
“Reply briefs, not to exceed eight pages in length, are permissible without leave of court. Any reply brief should not repeat points already made. Any replies must be filed within seven (7) days.”
Motions
A summary judgment movant must file a separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts of no more than 20 pages.
“Statement of Material Facts: The moving party shall file a separate ‘Statement of Undisputed Material Facts’ (not exceeding 20 pages in length) after the parties confer in good faith to narrow the factual issues in dispute.”
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 Jung decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Martinez v. Green Planet Mortgage, he found that the furnisher had effectively rubber-stamped credit-report disputes despite internal records exposing an error.
“Rather than performing a minimally reasonable investigation, Planet Home appears to have ‘rubber stamped’ the disputes as ‘accurate as date reported.’”
In Crespi v. BayCare Health System, he declined to resolve factual questions about website tracking at the dismissal stage and allowed several interception claims to proceed.
“At this stage, the Court declines to resolve the factual questions concerning the precise operation of the tracking technologies, the timing and manner of any interception, and the ultimate scope of the information disclosed.”
In Williams, Jung found a state habeas challenge remained live after the petitioner’s probation sentence ended because the challenged violation had been used as an aggravating factor in a later capital sentence. He denied the respondent’s mootness dismissal motion and ordered a response to the petition.
“Thus, Court finds the case is not moot.”
Procedural preferences
In Calhoun, Jung denied the officers’ motion to dismiss an excessive-force claim but separately screened out the supervisory claim against the warden because it alleged no concrete notice of prior abuse. The ruling preserves the direct claims while ending a thin supervisory theory.
“These vague allegations are insufficient to plead a supervisory-liability claim.”
In Flinn, Jung denied emergency requests without prejudice because the proposed next friend was not an attorney and could not represent the plaintiff.
“because Kim R. Flinn is not an attorney, she may not represent Plaintiff in this action.”
Cautions
Emergency injunctive relief must concern the same claims as the operative complaint; collateral prison-administration and sentence-credit disputes require their own proper procedural vehicle.
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Florida medical-negligence claims under the FTCA remain subject to state presuit prerequisites, including the required corroborating expert opinion.
“Because Mr. Wilkins did not fully comply with Florida’s pre-suit notice requirements for medical negligence claims, the Defendant is entitled to dismissal of the medical negligence claim.”
In Brodhurst, Jung dismissed a screened civil-rights complaint without prejudice after finding no facts connecting the named medical administrator to the alleged denial of care.
“Mr. Brodhurst alleges no facts connecting the Jail Medical Administrator to the alleged denial of care.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Court hereby GRANTS in part BSI's Motion to Dismiss. ... Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. ... In the absence of timely amendment, dismissal will be with prejudice without any further action of the Court.”
“The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion. Dkt. 5. The matter is remanded to the Circuit Court in and for Hillsborough County, Florida. The clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and close the file.”
“The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment, GRANTS the Sheriff's motion, and GRANTS and DENIES in part the Town's motion.”
In this bankruptcy appeal, Judge Jung affirmed the ruling that the debtors' 2001 income-tax liability was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(1)(C). He held that excessive discretionary spending instead of paying taxes can satisfy the evasive-conduct element and that the statute does not permit partial discharge.
“After hearing argument of counsel, and after careful consideration and review of the submissions of the parties and the entire file, the Court grants summary judgment.”
“Based on the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for relief from judgment (Dkt. 76) is DENIED.”
“Upon careful consideration, the Court grants Seminole's Motion.”
“ENDORSED ORDER denying 57 Motion to Dismiss. The amended complaint withstands the low bar of notice pleading. The allegations are facially plausible and collectively ‘raise a right to relief above the speculative level.’”
“Plaintiff's amended complaint (Dkt. 22) is dismissed with prejudice.”
“ORDER denying 1 & 5 Motion to Vacate / Set Aside / Correct Sentence (2255). A certificate of appealability and leave to appeal in forma pauperis is denied.”
“ORDER denying 1 Motion to Vacate / Set Aside / Correct Sentence (2255). No certificate of appealability is appropriate.”
“Based on the standard for dismissal, Defendant's motion must be denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed matters include a substantial Tampa criminal and False Claims Act caseload, plus recent consumer-credit, healthcare-privacy, and prisoner-tort disputes. Sealed qui tam intervention periods make many older cases poor timing measures, while the three newer matching streams provide five contested motion intervals. This is descriptive context rather than a caseload-wide rate.
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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 1 | 3 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2022 | 4 | 3 |
| Mar 2022 | 4 | 4 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 7 |
| Mar 2021 | 4 | 6 |
| Sep 2020 | 7 | 4 |
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 U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, not for Judge Jung: 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 Jung with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Jung, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Jung's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace