Aileen Mercedes Cannon
How Judge Cannon rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Cannon decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On summary judgment she requires competent record evidence, not the movant's own testimony or speculation; a scintilla is not enough.
“Speculation does not create a genuine issue of fact; instead, it creates a false issue, the demolition of which is a primary goal of summary judgment.”
Procedural preferences
Each summary-judgment record is judged on its own facts; she will not import an outcome from a related case decided on a different record.
“that O'Leary's wrongdoing harmed multiple litigants in different proceedings does not obviate the Court's obligation to assess the particular factual record presented in each case under the applicable legal standards”
Conducts de novo review of objected-to portions of a recommendation but accepts unobjected portions when the face of the record shows no clear error.
“To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge’s report, the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the record.”
Pleading deficiencies did not justify dismissal where they were legally permitted, raised trial-stage evidentiary issues, or could be addressed through jury instructions and verdict forms.
“the identified deficiencies, even if generating some arguable confusion, are either permitted by law, raise evidentiary challenges not appropriate for disposition at this juncture, and/or do not require dismissal even if technically deficient, so long as the jury is instructed appropriately and presented with adequate verdict forms”
When permitting amendment of a shotgun pleading, she requires each count to identify its legal basis, supporting facts, and the specific defendant responsible for the alleged conduct.
“each count must identify the particular legal basis for liability, separate each claim into a separate count, and incorporate and/or allege the specific factual allegations that support each cause of action within each count.”
Cautions
Arguments raised for the first time in objections to an R&R (e.g., res ipsa loquitur) are disfavored and unlikely to rescue a record that lacks evidence of breach.
“Without foreclosing the application of res ipsa loquitur in the airline context writ large, what is clear is that the event as pled in this case is not a quintessential res ipsa event”
Monell failure-to-train/supervise liability faces a 'difficult-to-satisfy' notice standard and a backward-looking inquiry; post-arrest conduct cannot create the required pre-existing notice.
“an inquiry into Monell liability for failure to train/supervise necessarily is backward looking, targeted at determining whether the municipality had information prior to the unconstitutional conduct”
The Appointments Clause dismissal rested on a close statutory reading that found no cited provision gave the Attorney General authority to appoint a special counsel exercising the powers at issue.
“None of the statutes cited as legal authority for the appointment—28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, 515, 533—gives the Attorney General broad inferior-officer appointing power or bestows upon him the right to appoint a federal officer with the kind of prosecutorial power wielded by Special Counsel Smith.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant Snyder's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 49] is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Consolidate Cases [ECF No. 65] is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Plaintiff's Amended Motion in limine is DENIED AS MOOT [ECF No. 62].”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 10] is GRANTED. ... Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1-1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 46] is GRANTED. This ruling is dispositive of all of Plaintiffs' claims in this action.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 49] is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Plaintiffs' Daubert Motion [ECF No. 48] ... are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Defendant's Motions to Strike Plaintiffs' Expert Reports [ECF Nos. 42-43] ... are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Defendant's Motion to Exclude the Opinions and Expert Testimony of Dr. Thomas Jenkyn [ECF No. 44] are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 15] is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 13] is DENIED for the reasons stated in the Report.”
“The Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 16] is DENIED.”
“The Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct ... 2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Class Action Complaint [ECF No. 22] is GRANTED. 3. Plaintiff's First Amended Class Action Complaint [ECF No. 16] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 4. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.”
“the Motion must be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART for the reasons set forth therein ... 2. The Motion [ECF No. 43] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. 3. Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 4. Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint that cures the pleading deficiencies outlined in the Report on or before October 8, 2021.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment [ECF No. 29] is GRANTED to the extent recommended in the Report.”
“The Motion [ECF No. 20] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART for the reasons stated in the Report.”
“The Motion to Dismiss is DENIED [ECF No. 352].”
“Defendants’ Motion to Strike is DENIED IN PART, GRANTED IN PART as to the improperly contained uncharged offense allegations [ECF No. 85 ¶ 36], and RESERVED IN PART as to potentially privileged information contained in the Superseding Indictment.”
“The Motion is therefore DENIED [ECF No. 485].”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Superseding Indictment Based on Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order [ECF No. 326].”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 245 days (N = 12).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 34.5 days (N = 42).
The current reviewed matters include many pending 2026 alien-detainee habeas petitions arising from immigration detention in South Florida. The reviewed 2021-2023 matters are predominantly criminal, with a smaller group of short-lived civil cases that were administrative or sealed. This provides descriptive context rather than a caseload-wide rate.
Draft for Judge Cannon with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Cannon, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Cannon's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace