Marc T. Treadwell

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia district Appointed by Barack Obama (Democratic) 19 signed orders read

How Judge Treadwell decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In a prisoner conditions-of-confinement suit, the judge treated a properly-exhausted grievance as a prerequisite that could defeat an otherwise potentially viable claim, regardless of whether the underlying facts might support relief.

“Because Bey's grievance was procedurally improper and its merits were not addressed, Bey failed to properly exhaust his administrative remedies.”

Procedural preferences

On a motion for reconsideration, the judge required more than a restated disagreement with the earlier ruling -- an intervening change in law, new evidence, or a clear error -- before revisiting a summary-judgment adoption.

“Reconsideration of a previous order is an extraordinary remedy to be employed sparingly.”

On a partial motion for judgment on the pleadings, the judge accepted the plaintiff's concession on the dispositive point (a missed state-law notice deadline) rather than requiring further briefing once the plaintiff's own response conceded the defect.

“In her response, Kaufman concedes that because she failed to comply with the GTCA's ante litem notice requirements, her state law claims are barred.”

Signed rulings

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

Bey v. Georgia Department of Corrections
5:19-CV-236 (MTT) · 2021-08-27
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Bey's motion to cease and desist and motion for summary judgment (Docs. 64; 65) are DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Further, the defendants' motions for summary judgment (Doc. 62; 79) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motions are GRANTED as to Bey's First Amendment, Eighth Amendment, and due process claims, and those claims are DISMISSED. The motions are DENIED as to Bey's RLUIPA claim, which will proceed to a bench trial.”

Huley v. Sheriff Bill Massee
5:16-CV-32 (MTT) · 2018-07-18
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“Huley has raised no change in the law, newly discovered evidence, or clear error in the Court's previous order. Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration (Doc. 93) is DENIED.”

Moss v. Knox
5:16-CV-10 (MTT) · 2016-05-04
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“The Recommendation is ADOPTED and made the order of this Court. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 21) is DENIED.”

Moss v. Knox
5:16-CV-10 (MTT) · 2017-04-20
Motion to amend complaint (plaintiff) Denied

“Thus, even considering the additional allegations, the Plaintiff fails to state a claim and, therefore, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's findings as to this claim... those motions to amend (Docs. 72; 77; 80) are DENIED.”

Moss v. Knox
5:16-CV-10 (MTT) · 2017-11-06
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“Moss has raised no change in the law, newly discovered evidence, or clear error to justify reconsideration of that order. Accordingly, his Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 89) is DENIED.”

Moss v. Knox
5:16-CV-10 (MTT) · 2018-03-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Prescott's motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies (Doc. 73) and Blanks and Henderson's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 103) is GRANTED. Moss's claims against Prescott are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and his claims against Blanks and Henderson are DISMISSED with prejudice.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Motion to amend complaint (plaintiff) Denied

“Moss's motion to amend (Doc. 126) is DENIED.”

Sterling v. Sellers
5:16-CV-13 (MTT) · 2017-03-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“As discussed above, the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Sterling's individual capacity RLUIPA claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. Also, Sterling's official capacity retaliation claims are DISMISSED as barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. Meanwhile, Sterling's free exercise and retaliation claims against the Defendants in their individual capacities are allowed to proceed.”

Sterling v. Sellers
5:16-CV-13 (MTT) · 2017-10-18
Motion to intervene (third_party) Denied

“Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has conducted a de novo review of the portions of the recommendation to which Daker objects and ADOPTS the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Daker's Motion to Intervene (Doc. 47) is DENIED.”

Sterling v. Sellers
5:16-CV-13 (MTT) · 2018-09-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 59) is GRANTED on the Plaintiff's official capacity claims under the First Amendment and the RLUIPA, on the individual capacity free exercise claims for the denial of the use of the dayroom for congregational prayer, and on the individual capacity free exercise claims for the Eid feast that accrued in 2012 and 2013. The Defendants' motion (Doc. 59) is GRANTED on all retaliation claims against Sellers and on all retaliation claims against Ivey. The Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED on the individual capacity claims under the First Amendment relating to the Defendants' prohibition of the Eid feast in 2014 and 2015.”

Sterling v. Sellers
5:16-CV-13 (MTT) · 2018-12-17
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 59) is GRANTED in part, as to the Plaintiff's claims under the Georgia Constitution. Those claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.”

United States ex rel. Parato v. Unadilla Health Care Center, Inc.
5:07-CV-76 (MTT) · 2011-03-28
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The Motions for Summary Judgment are GRANTED on Parato's false certification FCA claim. With regard to Parato's retaliation claim, the Motions are GRANTED to all individual defendants, and DENIED to UnaHealth. Finally, with regard to Parato's breach of contract claim, the Motions are GRANTED to all individual defendants, and DENIED to UnaHealth.”

Davis v. Berry
5:19-CV-14 (MTT) · 2019-06-03
Habeas corpus 2254 (petitioner) Denied

“Accordingly, the Respondent's motion to dismiss (Doc. 12) is GRANTED, and the petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The sampled docket, a suit alleging negligence and civil-rights violations after a patient was assaulted at a state-run mental-health facility, produced a partial ruling narrowing state-law claims for a notice-statute defect before the case was dismissed for want of prosecution when the plaintiff stopped participating after counsel withdrew. The broader sample also includes prisoner civil-rights suits, Social Security appeals, and insurance disputes.

Put Judge Treadwell's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Treadwell actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Treadwell's own signed orders and cites them.