Roy Kalman Altman

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Appointed by Donald Trump (Republican) 8 signed orders read

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.”

Enforces the four corners of a contract and will not award a remedy the instrument does not provide (here, no double recovery of both repossession and damages).

“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.”

Procedural preferences

Will not construct a party's arguments for them; an undeveloped argument is forfeited.

“the Court is not obligated to divine the parties' arguments for”

Cautions

Pro se litigants who file maliciously or fail to disclose litigation history risk dismissal WITH prejudice under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B); he adopts magistrate recommendations to that effect in full.

“I recommended that the case be dismissed with prejudice, and Judge Altman accepted and adopted the Report and Recommendation in full.”

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.”

Motion outcomes

Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.

Summary judgment
N = 7
Granted: 2Granted in part: 3Denied: 1Moot / procedural: 1 counts only
Motions to dismiss
N = 2
Granted in part: 1Denied: 1 counts only
Preliminary injunction
N = 1
Moot / procedural: 1 counts only
Motion for leave to amend
N = 1
Moot / procedural: 1 counts only
Motion to bifurcate
N = 1
Moot / procedural: 1 counts only

A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

McDonald v. City of Pompano Beach, Florida
0:20-cv-60297 · 2021-08-23
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The City's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 95] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“The Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 42] is DENIED as moot.”

Cendan v. School Board of Broward County, Florida
0:20-cv-61053 · 2022-09-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 96] is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“The Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF No. 108] is DENIED as moot.”

Forde v. Krantz Motor Yachts LLC
9:21-cv-80603 · 2023-10-26
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“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.”

Branyon v. Carnival Corporation
1:24-cv-20576 · 2024-06-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [ECF No. 10] is DENIED.”

Thompson v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
0:20-cv-61907 · 2022-01-06
Summary judgment (defendant) 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.”

Accessninja, Inc. v. Passninja, Inc.
1:24-cv-24745 · 2025-07-31
Motions to dismiss (plaintiff) Granted in part

“HF0's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Counterclaim [ECF No. 71] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”

Hall v. Harry Sargeant, III
9:18-cv-80748 · 2020-03-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted 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”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“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”

Motion for leave to amend (defendant) Moot / procedural

“HS3's Expedited and Renewed Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Add an Affirmative Defense [ECF No. 393] is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Motion to bifurcate (defendant) Moot / procedural

“HS3's Motion to Bifurcate Amount of Punitive Damages from Remaining Issues at Trial [ECF No. 398] is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Doherty v. Borrow (Borrows)
2:23-cv-14395 · 2026-03-09

Pro se prisoner 42 U.S.C. 1983 suit. Altman adopted MJ Reinhart's R&R in full (ECF 182) and dismissed the case WITH PREJUDICE as malicious under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) for failure to disclose litigation history. Outcome grounded from the magistrate's later cost R&R, which quotes the disposition; Altman's own 2026-03-09 order (on the motion to tax costs) is reproduced verbatim in that R&R and is excluded from motion stats as procedural. Illustrates how Altman handles abusive pro se filings.

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

A current assigned_judge enumeration is flooded by the 2026 S.D. Fla. alien-detainee 463 habeas surge (Krome/ICE petitions, all pending). Caseload is descriptive, not a base rate.