Thomas Q. Langstaff
How Judge Langstaff rules, drawn from 10 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Langstaff no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Langstaff
Thomas Q. Langstaff served as a United States Magistrate Judge in the Albany Division of the Middle District of Georgia. He retired before his successor began service in January 2025. He earned degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology and the University of Georgia School of Law.
How Judge Langstaff decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Social Security appeals, he reversed and remanded when the ALJ mischaracterized or discounted a treating physician's opinion without adequate reasoning, particularly in conditions like fibromyalgia where objective clinical findings are inherently sparse.
“The lack of objective clinical findings is, at least in the case of fibromyalgia, insufficient alone to support an ALJ's rejection of a treating physician's opinion as to the claimant's functional limitations.”
Procedural preferences
In Jernigan v. Allen, he recommended dismissing a prisoner's civil-rights complaint without prejudice because the complaint showed that the prisoner had not exhausted administrative remedies before filing suit.
“The Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 1997e(a), generally requires that a prisoner file an administrative grievance and then appeal any denial of relief through all levels of review that comprise the administrative grievance process before filing suit in federal court.”
As a criminal-duty magistrate, he required a law enforcement officer's first warrant application before him to be presented in person, before permitting that officer's later applications to be attested to by telephone or email under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 4.1's remote-attestation procedure.
“Agent Antonio appeared personally before now-retired United States Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff on that date to submit the warrant request because U.S. Magistrate Judge Langstaff required law enforcement officers requesting a warrant from him for the first time to participate in the warrant attestation process in-person.”
Cautions
In Helton v. Georgia Department of Corrections, his initial screening recommendation allowed retaliation and conspiracy claims against two defendants to proceed while finding the plaintiff's remaining constitutional and injunctive-relief claims without merit. The district court adopted that recommendation.
“Petitioner's claims for retaliation and conspiracy against Respondents Sergeant Burks and Remika Christian were sufficiently plead for the purposes of Judge Langstaff's review ... Petitioner's remaining claims for constitutional violations arising from denial of medical care, excessive force and sexual assault, and injunctive relief were found to be without merit.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“it is the RECOMMENDATION of the undersigned that the Commissioner's decision be REVERSED AND REMANDED pursuant to Sentence Four of Section 405(g) for further consideration in light of this opinion.”
“it is the recommendation of the undersigned that the Commissioner's decision be AFFIRMED pursuant to Sentence Four of Section 405(g).”
“it is the RECOMMENDATION of the undersigned that the petition be DENIED.”
“United States Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff's October 15, 2013 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 145) is ACCEPTED, ADOPTED and made the Order of this Court ... Accordingly, the Motions to Dismiss presently under review (Docs. 118, 126, & 128) are GRANTED.”
“The Petitioner has failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel at trial under the Strickland standard. WHEREFORE, it is recommended that Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 (Docs. 169, 170) be DENIED.”
“It is therefore RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice, pursuant to Section 1997e and Section 1915A(b)(1), to allow for exhaustion.”
“Petitioner's claims for retaliation and conspiracy against Respondents Sergeant Burks and Remika Christian were sufficiently plead for the purposes of Judge Langstaff's review ... Petitioner's remaining claims for constitutional violations arising from denial of medical care, excessive force and sexual assault, and injunctive relief were found to be without merit.”
“As Defendants have failed to meet their burden as the parties moving for summary judgment, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. (Doc. 75).”
“Judge Langstaff concluded that the Motion should be granted because the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, showed that the Moving Defendants had acted reasonably ... Judge Langstaff found that the Moving Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.”
“The United States Magistrate Judge ... carefully analyzed and denied Petitioner's habeas petition, finding that the claims therein were procedurally defaulted because they were either (1) not properly exhausted due to Petitioner's failure to petition the Georgia Supreme Court for a certificate of probable cause following the denial of his state habeas petition, or (2) abandoned by Petitioner in his post-hearing brief.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Sampled dockets were dominated by consent Social Security disability appeals (28 U.S.C. 636(c)), with the remainder split between a consent diversity personal-injury case and criminal-duty matters (initial appearance/detention hearing, a search-warrant application with a nondisclosure order).
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Langstaff was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2024.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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.
A historical record
Judge Langstaff no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.