William Theodore Moore Jr.
How Judge Moore rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Moore no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Moore
William Theodore Moore, Jr. was a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Moore received a commission on October 11, 1994. Judge Moore assumed senior status on February 28, 2017 and retired on March 31, 2024.
How Judge Moore decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Moore enforced contract-law waiver where an insurer kept the policy and premium after learning the asserted basis for rescission.
“by not seeking to repudiate the contract, the Plaintiff has effectively affirmed the contract”
He separated claims for damaged goods from independent injuries when applying federal carrier preemption.
“any claims by Plaintiff that remedy a separate harm than damages to goods are not dismissed.”
Procedural preferences
He enforced scheduling deadlines against a jury-demand challenge raised months late and after the pretrial conference.
“the Court DENIES the motion as untimely filed.”
He treated removal as a statute-specific question, distinguishing admiralty claims that could not be removed from federal statutory claims that could.
“Because admiralty claims are not federal question claims and are not removable under § 1441(b), this Court is convinced that remand is appropriate in this case.”
Cautions
He rejected requests asking the court to disregard governing rule text merely because both parties favored the same result.
“The Court finds Defendant’s argument to be offensive.”
He required evidence of employer knowledge and causation rather than speculation in retaliation cases.
“Plaintiff cannot show Defendant knew about Plaintiff’s purported opposition”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons stated herein, Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment are hereby GRANTED.”
“this Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART this motion as to Plaintiffs Title VII cause of action (Count I) and DENIES this motion as to Plaintiffs state law claim for nuisance (Count III).”
“this Court DENIES Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the claim against the United States”
“GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and dismisses with prejudice the claim against AFS.”
“For these reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is denied.”
“this Court VACATES its Order of December 12, 1995, which denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and, for the reasons stated above and for those stated in the previous Order, GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to the $250,000 payment at issue.”
“Having read and considered Plaintiff Barbara Christoph’s Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees, the motion is GRANTED IN PART”
“For the reasons stated below, this Court GRANTS the motion.”
“the Court DENIES the motion as untimely filed.”
“Claimant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is granted.”
“All claims against these defendants are DISMISSED either on the basis of the Eleventh Amendment, prosecutorial immunity, or qualified immunity.”
“Accordingly, all claims against Effingham County are DISMISSED.”
“Defendants’ motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“The order of the bankruptcy court shall be VACATED and the case DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs motion to remand this case to the State Court of Chatham County is GRANTED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The enumerated opening 2015 cohort mixed prisoner civil-rights and habeas matters with employment, consumer-credit, insurance, maritime, Social Security, and other civil cases. This narrow cohort is not a career-wide caseload estimate.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Moore 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 | 16 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 13 | 3 |
| Sep 2022 | 2 | 3 |
| Mar 2022 | 8 | 3 |
| Sep 2021 | 4 | 5 |
| Mar 2021 | 2 | 5 |
| Sep 2020 | 2 | 5 |
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 Moore 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.