Joe Billy McDade
How Judge McDade rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge McDade
Joe Billy McDade is a judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois. Appointed by President George H.W. Bush, Judge McDade received a commission on November 25, 1991. Judge McDade assumed senior status on February 28, 2010.
Judge McDade's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge McDade's own (checked October 11, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge McDade decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In United States ex rel. Morgan v. Champion Fitness, McDade adopted another court's reasoning when rejecting False Claims Act contribution and indemnification counterclaims, explaining that quoting sound reasoning was an efficient use of judicial resources.
“when a judge finds all that need be said has already been said eloquently by another court, it is both natural and an efficient use of judicial resources to quote and paraphrase the other court, with gratitude.”
In Hartford Casualty Insurance v. Moore, McDade refused to reform an insurance policy because the parties agreed on its retroactive date and misunderstood only its legal effect, which he treated as a mistake of law.
“Both parties understood that December 21, 2006 was the date to be written into the policy. They merely misunderstood what the legal effect of that date was. This was thus a mistake of law, which cannot support reformation of the policy.”
In T.G. ex rel. T.G. v. Midland School District 7, McDade affirmed the hearing officer’s substantive IDEA findings as reasonable, granted the district summary judgment, and declined additional compensatory education because he found no violation.
“the Court finds that the IHO's substantive determinations were reasonable and should be affirmed, and therefore finds no violation for which it should order compensatory education.”
Procedural preferences
In Hartford Casualty Insurance v. Moore, McDade stated that a summary-judgment opponent had to identify specific evidence supporting a triable issue rather than leave the court to search the record.
“It is not the Court’s function to scour the record in search of evidence to defeat a motion for summary judgment.”
Cautions
In United States ex rel. Morgan v. Champion Fitness, McDade warned both sides that further frivolous arguments or rule violations could lead to sanctions, stricken pleadings, or motions decided without consideration of the merits.
“Further frivolous arguments or filings will result in orders to show cause why the filing counsel should not be sanctioned.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Hartford Casualty Insurance Company's Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count I of its Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment (Doc. 48) is GRANTED.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is denied.”
“Relator's Motion (Doc. 51) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Counts I-V are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“the East Peoria Defendants' and the Peoria County Defendants' Motions to Dismiss are denied”
“the Tazewell County Defendants' ... Motion[] to Dismiss [is] granted”
“the ... Pekin Defendants' Motion[] to Dismiss [is] granted”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED”
“the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (# 42-1) and GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (#46-1)”
“the Court finds that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's claim of unreasonable and unlawful arrest must be granted”
“Plaintiff's motion is denied and Defendant's motion is granted”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 33] is GRANTED. This case is TERMINATED.”
“Defendants' attempt to retroactively amend the commission settlement period is without effect for the purposes of the FLSA, and ... a settlement period of seven days should be used”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 115 days (N = 1).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 224 days (N = 6).
Descriptive case-mix evidence from the nature-of-suit and cause fields for cases filed from 2008 through 2015, supplemented by published opinions; not an exhaustive census. No administrative case-disposition baseline is included for this inactive senior judge.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge McDade was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of March 31, 2025.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 3 | 3 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 9 |
| Sep 2021 | 1 | 5 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 4 |
| Sep 2020 | 5 | 4 |
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.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, not for Judge McDade: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 760 | 7.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 315 | 6.2 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 438 | 8.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 7 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 760 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 704 | 8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 625 | 10.8 months |
| Sep 2022 | 637 | 11.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 684 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 629 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 653 | 10.1 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge McDade with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge McDade, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge McDade's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace