Jean-Paul Boulee
How Judge Boulee decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On qualified immunity, Boulee asks whether a reasonable officer could have believed probable cause existed; conflicting evidence or a possible defense does not defeat arguable probable cause by itself.
“So long as it is reasonable to conclude from the body of evidence as a whole that a crime was committed, the presence of some conflicting evidence or a possible defense will not vitiate a finding of probable cause.”
At summary judgment, he treats claims or arguments not supported in the briefing as abandoned and does not construct an argument for the party.
“A passing reference to an issue in a brief is not enough, and the failure to make arguments and cite authorities in support of an issue waives it... it is not the role of the district court to distill from the record and then consider arguments that the party could have made.”
Procedural preferences
He requires precise jurisdictional allegations, including the citizenship of every member of a limited-liability company, and enforces the local rules governing statements of fact and disclosure obligations.
“merely alleging the location of formation or the principal place of business is not sufficient to show citizenship of a limited liability company... only stating where a defendant is not a citizen is not enough.”
He construes self-represented pleadings liberally and often permits a structured amendment before dismissing with prejudice, while still enforcing Rule 8 and the rule against shotgun pleadings.
“Before dismissing this case with prejudice and because Plaintiff has not given any indication that he does not wish to amend his Complaint, the Court will grant Plaintiff a final opportunity to amend.”
He addresses jurisdiction and standing before the merits, denies speculative jurisdictional discovery, and dismisses when the complaint does not plead the necessary forum contacts or standing facts.
“Because Plaintiffs failed to offer any contacts between Elevance and Georgia to which specific jurisdiction could attach or any facts showing that Elevance purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting business in Georgia, the Court finds that the allegations in the FAC do not support the exercise of specific jurisdiction over Elevance.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 53] is GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close this case.”
“Given that Battle's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 39) is GRANTED in its entirety, the Clerk is DIRECTED to close this case.”
“Accordingly, B.T.'s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 32) is DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Respondent's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 13] is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 4] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“The Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint [Doc. 5] is GRANTED. The First Amended Complaint [Doc. 2] is DISMISSED. The Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. 17] is GRANTED. The Second Amended Complaint [Doc. 8] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“All other pending motions, [Doc. 10]; [Doc. 13]; [Doc. 18]; [Doc. 22], are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“For the reasons set forth above, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 3] is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Tillman’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 50] is DENIED.”
“Defendant Clayton County’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 53] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages against Defendant Clayton County only is DISMISSED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Phoenix’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 27] and Konkordia’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 31] are GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE the case.”
“In light of Plaintiff’s obligation to file an amended complaint, Defendants’ motions to dismiss [Docs. 46, 48, 50, 52, 65, 69, 98] and Defendant Premiere’s Motion for Leave to File Matters Under Seal in supplement to its Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 99] are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“In sum, NSM’s Motion (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED with respect to Counts One and Five and DENIED with respect to Count Two. Gordon is granted leave to amend Count Two of the Complaint.”
“For the reasons stated above, this matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of standing. Intervenors’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 66] is thus DENIED as moot. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close this case.”
“For the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge, Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss as Untimely [Doc. 7] is GRANTED. This action is HEREBY DISMISSED as untimely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 846 days (N = 8).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 188 days (N = 4).
The reviewed matters, including his earliest cases filed in 2018, span employment, consumer-credit, wage-and-hour, civil-rights, insurance, contract, diversity, and prisoner disputes. Magistrate judges appearing in the reviewed matters include Catherine M. Salinas, Russell G. Vineyard, Christopher C. Bly, Regina Diane Cannon, John K. Larkins III, J. Elizabeth McBath, John H. Rains IV, and Anna W. Howard.
Put Judge Boulee's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Boulee actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Boulee's own signed orders and cites them.