Edwin G. Torres
How Judge Torres rules, drawn from 30 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Torres
Edwin G. Torres has served as a U.S. magistrate judge in the Miami Division of the Southern District of Florida since 2003. He previously served as the district's chief magistrate judge. His judicial work includes referred civil matters and recommendations on dispositive motions.
Judge Torres's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Torres, 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
Discovery
Do not make conclusory boilerplate discovery objections.
“Parties shall not make conclusory boilerplate objections.”
Discovery
State clearly whether all responsive documents or information have been produced, or identify what was withheld.
“Counsel shall include in the answer a clear statement that all responsive documents/information identified have in fact been produced/provided, or otherwise describe the category of documents/ information that have been withheld on the basis of the objection.”
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 8, 2026).
How Judge Torres decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Beck, Torres dismissed a self-represented employment complaint as an impermissible shotgun pleading because it did not connect factual allegations to separately stated claims, while allowing an opportunity to amend.
“We therefore find that Plaintiff engaged in an impermissible shotgun pleading that has failed to provide the Defendant with proper notice of the allegations against which it must defend.”
In Derhem, Torres applied a 40% reduction to supplemental fee requests after identifying overstaffing, block billing, vague entries, and work that could not be recovered or fairly charged to every opposing party.
“Here, a 40% reduction is appropriate.”
In a trademark dispute involving imported anchors, Torres denied preliminary relief because the existing record did not show likely success on the merits or irreparable harm; he left later merits development open.
“A preliminary injunction is a remedy of equity, reserved for the party whose right is clear and whose injury cannot wait.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“In the R&R, Judge Torres recommends that the Court deny Defendants' Motion ... The R&R, ECF No. [42], is ADOPTED; ... Defendants' Motion for Specific Findings of Compliance with Rule 11 Pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, ECF No. [32], is DENIED.”
“On November 5, 2024, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending that the Court grant Plaintiffs' Motion. ... Plaintiffs' Motion for a Final Turnover Judgment as to Blocked PDVSA Funds, [ECF No. 207], is GRANTED; ... for a total turnover amount of $7,672,084.39”
“In the Report, Judge Torres recommends that Defendant's motion for countersecurity should be granted. ... Defendant's motion for countersecurity (DE 18) is GRANTED. ... Plaintiff shall post $65,000 as countersecurity into the Court's registry.”
“recommending that Defendants' Motion be granted in part and denied in part. ... Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees is DENIED; ... Motion to Tax Costs of $402.00 ... is GRANTED; ... $24.20 ... is GRANTED”
“Judge Torres issued his report, recommending that the Motion be denied. ... Defendant Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.'s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, [ECF No. 98], is DENIED.”
“the Court agrees with Judge Torres' well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be denied ... Plaintiff Athos Overseas, Ltd.'s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, [ECF Nos. 113, 125], is DENIED.”
“and Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. ... Defendants YouTube, Inc., YouTube, LLC, and Google LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment, [ECF Nos. 115, 134-1], is GRANTED.”
“The Court finds that the vessel still constitutes salvage. The parties stipulated as such in the Joint Pretrial Stipulation, and the Court finds that the elements of a salvage claim have been established. The amount of salvage due under the parties' Agreement is $30,000, plus prejudgment interest.”
“the Court finds there are disputed issues of material facts as to each of the claims asserted in this case. Accordingly, the Court denies each of the pending motions for summary judgment for the reasons set forth below.”
“This matter is before the Court on Defendant TVT's Rule 50(b) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law [D.E. 453]. Upon review of the Motion, Plaintiff's Response, and TVT's Reply in Support, this matter is ripe for disposition. For the reasons that follow, TVT's Motion must be Denied.”
“the Court will grant in part and deny in part TVT's motion for a new trial and alternative motion for remittitur, for the reasons discussed below.”
“Upon review of the entire record in the case and based on the reasons that follow, TVT's Motion will be Denied. The Court finds that, in its discretion, there is no basis to grant TVT any relief under Rule 60(b) to set aside the Court's Final Judgment [D.E. 435], as subsequently amended following the denial of TVT's Rule 50 and 59 motions.”
“Based upon a thorough review of the record as a whole and the arguments in the parties' motions, we find that Defendants failed to show that there are no genuine issues of material fact for trial. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 59-1] is DENIED.”
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 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 1 |
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 Southern District of Florida, not for Judge Torres: 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 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 848 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 7,287 | 3.5 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 16 | 10.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 45 | 17.1 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,755 | 3.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 20,408 | 0 months |
| Sep 2022 | 8,287 | 3.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 8,536 | 3.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,657 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 9,471 | 3.7 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 Torres with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Torres, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Torres's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace