William Clark O'Kelley

United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia district Retired 2017 · served 1970–2017 Appointed by Richard Nixon (Republican) 18 signed orders read

Judge O'Kelley no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge O'Kelley decides

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

What persuades

O'Kelley treated the absence of factual disputes and a clear legal basis as the core conditions for summary judgment.

“Only those claims for which there is no need for a factual determination and for which there is a clear legal basis are properly disposed of through summary judgment.”

On bankruptcy review, he required remand when outcome-determinative findings were missing or ambiguous.

“If the bankruptcy court is silent or ambiguous as to an outcome determinative factual question, the case must be remanded to the bankruptcy court for the necessary factual findings.”

Procedural preferences

O'Kelley resolved jurisdictional uncertainty in favor of remand to state court.

“Where plaintiff and defendant clash about jurisdiction, uncertainties are resolved in favor of remand.”

He described motions to strike as disfavored and required clear legal insufficiency before using that remedy.

“Motions to strike are disfavored and will usually be denied unless the pleading sought to be stricken is clearly insufficient as a matter of law.”

Cautions

O'Kelley treated changes to county sovereign immunity as a matter for Georgia's political branches rather than the federal court.

“Any problems with sovereign immunity for counties must await the action of the legislature”

He warned that parties should voluntarily remove untenable claims rather than force an opponent to incur summary-judgment costs.

“No defendant should have to bear the cost of moving for summary judgment on claims that should have been voluntarily dismissed.”

Signed rulings

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

Preserve Endangered Areas of Cobb's History, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers
· 1995-08-24
Motions to dismiss (federal defendants) Granted

“The federal defendants’ motion to dismiss is hereby GRANTED [14-1]”

Motion for reconsideration (Cobb County) Granted

“Defendant Cobb County’s motion for reconsideration is hereby GRANTED [30-1]”

Motion for reconsideration (federal defendants) Granted

“The federal defendants’ motion for reconsideration is hereby GRANTED [33-1]”

Motion for extension of time (federal defendants) Granted

“The federal defendants’ motion for extension of time is hereby GRANTED [37-1]”

Ford v. City of Oakwood, Ga.
· 1995-09-22
Motion for leave to amend (defendant McCauley) Granted

“Defendant McCauley’s motion for leave to amend his counterclaim is hereby GRANTED [20-1]”

Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs First Amendment claim under section 1983 against them in their capacity as individuals is hereby GRANTED [14-1]”

Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs claim for age discrimination under section 1983 is hereby GRANTED [14-1]”

Satterfield v. J.M. Huber Corp.
· 1995-05-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the court hereby GRANTS defendant’s motion for summary judgment in its entirety [20-1]”

Standridge v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
· 1996-09-18
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiffs motion to remand is hereby GRANTED [5-1]”

York v. United States
· 1986-02-10
Summary judgment (United States) Granted

“The court grants the motion of the US for summary judgment.”

Bliss v. Cobb County
· 1984-12-07
Summary judgment (Cobb County) Granted

“The court grants defendant’s motion for summary judgment.”

Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. Home Indemnity Co.
· 1979-09-25
Summary judgment (defendant insurer) Granted

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is hereby granted.”

Smith v. McDaniel
· 1980-05-23
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“the court hereby grants the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment”

Motions to strike (defendant) Denied

“denies the defendant’s motions to strike the affidavits of the plaintiff and of Alan Mirman.”

Motions to strike (defendant) Denied
Siegel v. Associated Indemnity Corp.
· 1977-05-20
Motion for judgment on pleadings (defendant insurer) Granted

“defendant’s motion on the pleadings should be granted.”

Chamblee v. Schweiker
· 1981-06-11
Social security appeal (claimant) Denied

“The Secretary’s decision denying the plaintiff disability benefits is hereby affirmed.”

Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Hybrid Conversions, Inc.
· 2011-08-29
Default judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiffs ‘Motion for Final Judgment’ [44] is hereby GRANTED against all defendants.”

Andrews v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc.
· 2007-08-24
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“defendants’ motion to dismiss [2 — 1] is hereby GRANTED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The enumerated slices included Social Security, civil-rights, contract, intellectual-property, insurance, consumer-credit, prisoner, employment, and housing matters. They are tenure slices rather than a complete caseload census.

A historical record

Judge O'Kelley no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.