Michael J. Frank
How Judge Frank rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Frank
Michael J. Frank serves as a U.S. magistrate judge in the Northern District of Florida. His chambers are in Pensacola, where he handles civil and criminal pretrial matters.
Judge Frank's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Frank, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
Meet and confer before motions before Judge Frank; failure usually leads to denial.
“Parties are expected to comply with their meet and confer obligations and in most circumstances a failure to do so will result in a denial of the pertinent motion.”
Conferences
Remote appearances before Judge Frank require prior approval unless the hearing notice says otherwise.
“telephonic or remote appearances are allowed only with prior approval from Judge Frank.”
Conferences
A motion to set a referred hearing before Judge Frank must offer at least three dates and times.
“the parties must file a motion that includes at least three dates and times.”
Conferences
After a hearing notice, request a new date by motion to continue.
“All requests for a new hearing date after a notice of hearing has been posted must be made through a motion to continue.”
Trial
Parties presenting exhibits before Judge Frank must supply a courtesy copy.
“If exhibits are to be presented during a hearing or trial, the Court requires a courtesy copy.”
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Frank decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Easley’s prisoner civil-rights case, Frank recommended dismissal without prejudice as malicious because the plaintiff did not fully disclose prior litigation on the complaint form.
“The undersigned recommends that this case be dismissed as malicious, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and 1915A(b)(1), for Easley’s abuse of the judicial process in failing to completely and honestly disclose his prior litigation history.”
His dispositive rulings are reports and recommendations subject to the district judge's review; he reminds parties that objections must be filed within fourteen days and that failing to file specific objections waives the right to challenge unobjected-to findings on appeal.
“A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that: 1. Respondent's motion to dismiss, Doc. 11, be GRANTED. 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus, Doc. 1 ... be DISMISSED with prejudice as time-barred. 3. The District Court DENY a certificate of appealability.”
“the petition for writ of habeas corpus ... challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Willie V. Cruz, Santa Rosa County Circuit Court Case No. 2015-CF-447, be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as time barred. 3. The District Court DENY a certificate of appealability.”
“1. Respondent's motion to dismiss, Doc. 8, be GRANTED. 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) ... be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as time-barred.”
“1. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 7) be GRANTED. 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) ... be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as time barred. 3. The District Court DENY a certificate of appealability.”
“The State's motion to dismiss should be denied, because Lee's habeas petition is timely. ... 1. Respondent's motion to dismiss, Doc. 26, be DENIED. 2. This case be returned to the undersigned for further proceedings.”
“1. GRANT SCC's motion to dismiss, Doc. 28, and DISMISS with prejudice Schooley's claims against SCC. 2. DENY Schooley's conditional request to file a fourth amended complaint.”
An 11-page report and recommendation screening a pro se prisoner civil-rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B). Judge Frank recommended sua sponte dismissal as malicious for the plaintiff's abuse of the judicial process in failing to honestly disclose his prior litigation history, and also recommended denying the plaintiff's motion for a permanent injunction.
“GRANT Defendant Craig B. Morris’s ‘Motion to Dismiss,’ Doc. 16;”
“For the reasons set forth above, the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that the District Court: 1. GRANT Plaintiff’s ‘Motion for Default Final Judgment and Attorney’s Fees and Cost,’ Doc. 28; and 2. ENTER judgment against Defendants in the amount of $37,515.50—$25,611.50 in damages, $10,889.00 in attorney’s fees, and $1,015.00 in costs.”
“REMAND this civil action to the Circuit Court of the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Washington County, Florida;”
“DENY Bodiford’s motion to dismiss. Doc. 74.”
“DENY Devore-Guifarro’s motion to dismiss. Doc. 79.”
“DISMISS Porter’s § 2254 amended petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Judge Frank's directly assigned and consent docket includes magistrate criminal-duty matters, Social Security disability appeals, ADA public-accommodation suits, insurance and Medicaid disputes, and occasional copyright cases.
- Much of his additional work consists of reports and recommendations in referred state-habeas and prisoner civil-rights matters, which are not reflected in the assigned-case mix.
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 Northern District of Florida, not for Judge Frank: 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 | 148,428 | 47.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 30 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 148,385 | 47.7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 4 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 9 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 148,428 | 47.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 140,479 | 43.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 36,307 | 27.8 months |
| Sep 2022 | 57,845 | 21.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 14,972 | 5.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 6,038 | 6.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,148 | 7.5 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 Frank with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Frank, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Frank's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace