Allen Cothrel Winsor

United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida district Appointed by Donald J. Trump (Republican) 10 signed orders read

How Judge Winsor decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On summary judgment, an expert's conclusory legal labels ('grossly negligent') are not evidence and cannot create a genuine dispute; a deliberate-indifference plaintiff must show far more than malpractice or misdiagnosis. Decision-grade: bring record facts, not expert legal conclusions.

“On summary judgment, a court cannot accept an expert's legal conclusions; it must instead examine the expert affidavit itself to see if a genuine dispute of material fact is presented.”

Procedural preferences

Reviews magistrate-judge Reports & Recommendations de novo where a party objects and adopts unobjected R&Rs; the sampled dispositive dispositions overwhelmingly issue as R&R-adoption orders (prisoner/habeas/employment). He will also depart from an R&R on a point of law (e.g., elevating a recommended without-prejudice dismissal to with-prejudice; overruling an R&R that would have denied summary judgment).

“I have considered de novo this issues raised in Plaintiff's objections. ... I have determined the report and recommendation should be adopted.”

Cautions

Cuts off serial amendment once a plaintiff has had multiple chances: dismissals after repeated opportunities are with prejudice and leave to amend is denied. Replead carefully the first time.

“he has had multiple opportunities to amend, and I have determined there should be no further leave to amend.”

Strict on timeliness/procedural bars: a 2241 detainer habeas was dismissed as untimely without reaching the merits and the certificate of appealability denied. Time-bars are enforced.

“I agree with the magistrate judge and the State that the petition is untimely. It will be dismissed on that basis. ... A certificate of appealability is DENIED.”

Motion outcomes

Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.

Motions to dismiss
N = 4
Granted: 3Moot / procedural: 1 counts only
Summary judgment
N = 3
Granted: 2Denied: 1 counts only
Default judgment
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Motion for attorney fees
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Involuntary dismissal
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Motion for leave
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Screening dismissal 1915a
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Motion for leave to supplement
N = 1
Denied: 1 counts only
Habeas petition
N = 1
Denied: 1 counts only

A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Mark Mann v. Dr. C. Calderon, et al.
1:17-cv-00241-AW-GRJ · 2021-03-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“I therefore conclude that Dr. Calderon is entitled to summary judgment. I also conclude that the other defendants are entitled to summary judgment for the reasons the magistrate judge explains. ... All claims are now dismissed on the merits. Plaintiff Mark Mann shall recover nothing from this action.”

American Contractors Indemnity Co., et al. v. Allan Spear Construction LLC, et al.
1:21-cv-00021-AW-GRJ · 2021-10-12
Default judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“The motion for default judgment (ECF No. 17) and the motion for fees and costs (ECF No. 22) are GRANTED.”

Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted

“The motion for default judgment (ECF No. 17) and the motion for fees and costs (ECF No. 22) are GRANTED. ... It will also include $8,083.50 in fees and $1,111.98 in costs ... determine the requested fees to be reasonable.”

Retcnick Fausten v. AT&T Services, Inc.
4:21-cv-00016-AW-MAF · 2021-12-28
Involuntary dismissal (defendant) Granted

“The Defendant's motion for involuntary dismissal (ECF No. 79) is GRANTED. The clerk will enter a judgment that says, 'This case is dismissed with prejudice as malicious, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).'”

Alternative Materials, LLC v. TCH Construction Group, Inc., et al.
5:20-cv-00239-AW-MJF · 2022-07-05
Summary judgment Denied

“I agree with the magistrate judge's analysis and adopt the report and recommendation in full. The motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 54) is DENIED.”

Glen Schooley v. Option One Mortgage Corp. (a/k/a Sand Canyon Corp.), et al.
5:21-cv-00219-AW-MJF · 2022-10-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against Option One Mortgage Corporation are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff may not amend for the reasons set out in the report and recommendation.”

Jacob Waller v. James Kight, et al.
1:21-cv-00196-AW-ZCB · 2023-02-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The motion for partial summary judgment (ECF No. 33) is GRANTED. All claims against the movants are dismissed on the merits, except for the Eighth Amendment excessive-force claims against Defendants Kight and Lord, which the motion did not address.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 26) is DENIED as moot.”

Glen Schooley v. Sand Canyon Corp., Linda Flowers & Sharon Cason
5:21-cv-00219-AW-MJF · 2023-05-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motions to dismiss (ECF No. 78, 82) are GRANTED. ... All claims against Defendant Sand Canyon Corporation are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The Count One claims against Defendants Linda Flowers and Sharon Cason are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The Count Three claims ... are dismissed without prejudice because the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over them.”

Motion for leave (plaintiff) Granted

“The motion for leave to file untimely objections (ECF No. 86) is GRANTED, and the objections (ECF No. 87) are deemed timely.”

Anthony Aubrey Yawn v. John Palmer, et al.
1:22-cv-00249-AW-HTC · 2023-05-18
Screening dismissal 1915a (court) Granted

“This action is dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b)(1) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”

Motion for leave to supplement (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion for leave to supplement (ECF No. 17) is DENIED.”

Shawn M. Kesling v. State of Florida
1:20-cv-00143-AW-MAF · 2023-05-23
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“I agree with the magistrate judge and the State that the petition is untimely. It will be dismissed on that basis. ... The clerk will enter a judgment that says, 'The 2241 petition is dismissed as untimely.' A certificate of appealability is DENIED.”

Kirklynn J. Ferrell v. Secretary, Dep't of Corrections
4:22-cv-00401-AW-ZCB · 2023-05-30
Motions to dismiss (respondent) Granted

“The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED. The clerk will enter a judgment that says, 'The 2254 petition is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.'”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 207.5 days (N = 20).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 7 days (N = 3).

2021-01 cohort (20 terminated civil cases) + a June-2026 pending enumeration show a broad N.D. Fla. district docket: heavy prisoner civil-rights (42:1983) and state habeas (2254), plus employment discrimination (Title VII / 42:1981 / 42:1983), property/flood insurance (Wright Flood, Allstate, Blackboard), diversity breach-of-contract, product liability (Zoll Medical), patent (ABC IP v. Mercier & Sons), mortgage/foreclosure, and general civil rights. Referral magistrates surfaced (in registry; Midori A. Lowry newly harvested): Martin A. Fitzpatrick, Michael J. Frank, Gary R. Jones, Hope T. Cannon, Zachary C. Bolitho, Midori A. Lowry.