Maurice Mitchell Paul
How Judge Paul rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Paul no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Paul
Maurice Mitchell Paul was a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Paul received a commission on June 21, 1982. Judge Paul assumed senior status on July 31, 1997 and served until death on December 29, 2016.
How Judge Paul decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In prisoner litigation, the court applies the PLRA exhaustion requirement strictly as mandatory and non-discretionary. An incomplete grievance process is fatal, and an assertion that officials 'thwarted' an appeal does not excuse non-exhaustion when the inmate could appeal while noting the lack of response. The analysis underscores the need to complete each available grievance step before filing suit.
“Under the cases cited by the Magistrate Judge, such exhaustion of administrative remedies is mandatory, and the undersigned does not have discretion to waive this requirement.”
In Brown v. McNeil, Paul denied a certificate of appealability after finding that the petitioner’s claims lacked merit and that the issues were not debatable among jurists of reason.
“a petitioner who has been denied relief in a district court 'must demonstrate that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve the issues [in a different manner]; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.' ... Petitioner has not demonstrated that the issues raised therein are debatable among jurists of reason.”
Procedural preferences
In Travis Barrett Nave v. Kathleen Fuhrman, Paul reviewed the plaintiff's objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation de novo, adopted the recommendation, and granted the defendant's summary-judgment motion on the Eighth Amendment claims.
“Plaintiff has filed objections at Doc. 93. I have made a de novo review based on those objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objections, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.”
Cautions
In David J. Byrnes v. Lucy Hadi, Paul adopted a recommendation to dismiss the case without prejudice after the plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint despite several directions to do so.
“the Court agrees that plaintiff failed to follow an order of the Court by not filing an amended complaint despite being told to do so several times. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is adopted and this case dismissed without prejudice for failure to follow an order of the Court.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant's motion for summary judgment (doc. 74) is GRANTED as Plaintiff has not established a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant on all claims.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 55, is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Doc. 34, is DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to note on the docket that this cause was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)”
“The motions to dismiss at docs. 36, 48, 52, and 53 are granted, and this action is DISMISSED with regard to the defendants who brought such motions.”
“Doc. 10, Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, is DENIED.”
“Doc. 7, Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“The motion to dismiss at Doc. 11 is granted and the petition at Doc. 1 is dismissed with prejudice as untimely. A certificate of appealability is denied.”
“A certificate of appealability is denied.”
“Petitioner's Motion for Certificate of Appealability (Doc. 104) is DENIED.”
“the Report and Recommendation is adopted and this case dismissed without prejudice for failure to follow an order of the Court.”
“The Motion to Dismiss and Discharge, Doc. 19, is GRANTED. This cause is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“The motion to dismiss at Doc. 3 is mooted by the Amended Complaint and should be terminated by the Clerk.”
“ORDERED and ADJUDGED the claims against Dunlop Tire Corporation and Defendant Ford Motor Company are dismissed with prejudice with each party to bear its own costs, expenses and attorney's fees.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 112, is GRANTED, and this cause DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2). ... shall constitute a ‘strike’ within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(g).”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 29, is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 38, is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 205.5 days (N = 20).
- His docket is bimodal by era. The active and early-senior years (1976-2007 sampled) carried a substantive civil mix: employment civil rights, securities, contract and negotiable instruments, tax, Social Security disability appeals, and prisoner/habeas matters.
- The late-senior years (his 2016 docket sampled) are overwhelmingly pro se prisoner cases: 42:1983 prison-condition suits and 28:2254/2255/2241 habeas petitions, most terminated within days to weeks on screening or recommendation.
- This skew is why the written-order merits outcomes lean defendant/respondent-favorable.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Paul was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2025.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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.
A historical record
Judge Paul no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.