Roy Kalman Altman
How Judge Altman rules, drawn from 33 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Altman
Roy Kalman Altman is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Altman received a commission on April 9, 2019.
Judge Altman's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Altman, 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
Contacting chambers
Do not call chambers for the status of a pending motion or case; updates appear on the docket.
“Do not call Chambers for the status of a pending motion or a case. All updates will be posted on the docket.”
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 Altman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On summary judgment, the non-movant must come forward with actual record evidence; speculation or an empty record loses.
“[S]peculation isn't enough to survive summary judgment.”
In Forde v. Krantz Motor Yachts LLC, he granted summary judgment on the mortgage claims but held that the mortgage permitted Krantz to recover either the yacht or damages, not both.
“We note that the Mortgage doesn’t entitle Krantz to both repossession of the yacht and recovery of the $292,240.56 he’s claimed in damages. Instead, he may recover one or the other in accordance with paragraph 16 of the Mortgage.”
Procedural preferences
In Cendan v. School Board of Broward County, Florida, he rejected an unexplained summary-judgment argument because the plaintiff did not identify which element of her claim the cited fact supported.
“It’s simply not our job to divine her intentions.”
Cautions
On a procedural-due-process / constructive-discharge theory, a voluntary, signed resignation forecloses the claim.
“If circumstances establish that an employee was not terminated and instead resigned voluntarily, due process is not implicated.”
After giving a plaintiff repeated chances to repair pleading defects, he dismissed a further deficient complaint with prejudice. The order cited the prior warning that the latest amendment was the plaintiff’s final opportunity.
“Enough is enough: The SAC is dismissed with prejudice.”
In Jean v. City of North Miami Beach, Altman found the amended complaint’s municipal-ratification theory inadequate because it identified no policymaker who had reviewed and approved the detective’s alleged evidence fabrication. He allowed another amendment.
“He never identifies a ‘policymaker’ who had an opportunity to review Detective Hill’s decision to fabricate false eyewitness testimony”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The City's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 95] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“The Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 42] is DENIED as moot.”
“The Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 96] is GRANTED.”
“The Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF No. 108] is DENIED as moot.”
“Krantz's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 95] is GRANTED as to Counts I and II, and Krantz may enforce his 'Remedies upon Default,' as laid out in paragraph 16 of the Mortgage.”
“the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [ECF No. 10] is DENIED.”
“For many of the same reasons we outlined in a recent case, Torres v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. ... we disagree and now DENY the motion.”
“HF0's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaim [ECF No. 71] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“HS3's Motion [ECF No. 320] is GRANTED as to Count III and GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as to Count II”
“The Plaintiffs' Motion [ECF No. 321] is DENIED as to Count III, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as to Count II, and GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as to HS3's Affirmative Defenses”
“HS3's Expedited and Renewed Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Add an Affirmative Defense [ECF No. 393] is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“HS3's Motion to Bifurcate Amount of Punitive Damages from Remaining Issues at Trial [ECF No. 398] is DENIED AS MOOT.”
In Doherty, Altman adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the prisoner's case with prejudice. A later order records the adoption but gives no reasons for it.
“Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 25] is GRANTED”
“Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 23] is GRANTED”
“Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 121] is GRANTED as to Count II”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The current reviewed matters include many pending 2026 alien-detainee habeas petitions arising from immigration detention in South Florida. This provides descriptive context rather than a caseload-wide rate.
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 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, not for Judge Altman: 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 Altman with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Altman, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Altman's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace