LaShonda Annette Hunt
How Judge Hunt rules, drawn from 27 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Hunt
LaShonda Annette Hunt is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Hunt received a commission on May 26, 2023.
Judge Hunt's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Hunt, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Contacting chambers
Email the draft plea agreement to the courtroom deputy at least three business days before the hearing.
“In addition, a draft copy of the proposed plea agreement must be emailed to the courtroom deputy at least three business days prior to the hearing.”
Motions
File motions by the third business day before presentment.
“motions must be filed no later than the third business day (excluding federal holidays and weekends) before the motion is to be presented.”
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 8, 2026).
How Judge Hunt decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Murphy v. Health Care Service Corp., Hunt denied the insurer’s dismissal motion because the plaintiff plausibly alleged that the challenged policy discriminated based on sexual orientation under Section 1557.
“Because Plaintiff has adequately alleged that the policy discriminates against those people based only on their sexual orientation, the Court denies the motion to dismiss.”
In Leo S. v. Kijakazi, Hunt remanded the disability claim because the administrative law judge did not explain the evidence supporting her step-five conclusion.
“Because she did not provide that information, the Court cannot find that an accurate and logical bridge has been built between the evidence and her step-five conclusion.”
Procedural preferences
In Eagle Express Lines v. United States, Hunt granted a dismissal motion only as to the truck company’s indemnification claim because the complaint did not allege the required special relationship. She allowed its negligence and contribution counts to proceed.
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [21] is granted in part as to the indemnification claim (Count I) and denied as to the remaining negligence and contribution claims (Counts II, III, IV, V).”
Cautions
In Earley v. City of Chicago, Hunt dismissed a due process claim without prejudice because the complaint alleged no facts suggesting officers chose not to pursue an assailant with intent to cause harm, as required on the circumstances she analyzed.
“Accordingly, Earley has not plausibly alleged that the officers’ decision not to pursue Brownlee shocks the conscience.”
In one biometric-privacy case, the court read the Illinois driver-license statute to cover Illinois-issued licenses. It allowed the plaintiff to amend the count with a named plaintiff who held one.
“For these reasons, the Court finds that both the plain meaning of ‘a driver’s license’ and context of the IDLL places non-Illinois licenses outside the scope of 625 ILCS 5/6-117.1(a).”
In one naturalization summary-judgment review, she did not consider a notarized supporting statement because the witness had not sworn to its truth under penalty of perjury.
“Mr. Smith’s ‘affidavit’ is not sworn, and therefore, it is not an affidavit.”
In one civil rights suit, receiving evidence several months before the filing deadline did not support equitable estoppel when the plaintiff did not explain why that time was insufficient or identify further interference with filing.
“Plaintiff does not explain why seven months was an insufficient amount of time to pursue his claims and he has made no allegations that Defendants further prevented his timely filing.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the following reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss [14] is granted and Plaintiff's complaint [1] is dismissed without prejudice.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [12] is granted, and the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment [17] is denied.”
“For all the foregoing reasons, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [21] is granted in part as to the indemnification claim (Count I) and denied as to the remaining negligence and contribution claims (Counts II, III, IV, V).”
“Currently pending before the Court is Defendants' motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, Defendants' motion [112] is granted in part and denied in part.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [15] is denied.”
“For the reasons stated above, Defendants' second motion to dismiss [13] is denied.”
“For the reasons that follow, Defendants' motions (Case No. 20-cv-04947, Dkt. 52; Case No. 20-cv-04948, Dkt. 50) are denied in part and granted in part.”
“For all the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motions to dismiss are granted, and the CAC is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs are granted leave to file an amended class action complaint consistent with this ruling by 2/7/25.”
“For all the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“For all the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s combined motion for class certification and motion to bar defense expert Jan Kostyun is granted as to class certification and denied as to excluding Kostyun.”
“Defendants’ cross-motion to bar Plaintiff’s expert Aaron Woolfson is denied.”
“For all the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion is granted and Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.”
“For all the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted, Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, and the motion to intervene is terminated as moot.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 168 days (N = 15).
Judge Hunt's reviewed docket includes immigration-delay suits, consumer-credit disputes, insurance coverage, intellectual-property enforcement, copyright, employee-benefit collection, product liability, aviation, prisoner civil-rights matters, and a criminal calendar.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 34 |
| 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 | 30 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 34 | 30 |
| Sep 2025 | 73 | 44 |
| Mar 2025 | 50 | 47 |
| Sep 2024 | 61 | 49 |
| Mar 2024 | 54 | 42 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 46 |
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 Northern District of Illinois, not for Judge Hunt: 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 | 12,205 | 5.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 4,300 | 7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 7,558 | 5.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 305 | 12.6 months |
| Closed during trial | 42 | 49.5 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 12,205 | 5.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 9,700 | 6.8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 7,093 | 6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 6,841 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 9,703 | 15.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,046 | 10.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 8,134 | 7.4 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 Hunt with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hunt, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hunt's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace