Martin C. Ashman
Judge Ashman no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Ashman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He reads Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b) as displacing the older multi-factor balancing test for inadvertent disclosure: privileged material produced by mistake is not waived so long as the producing party shows the disclosure was inadvertent, that it took reasonable steps to prevent it, and that it took reasonable steps to rectify it.
“Under FRE 502, however, disclosure of privileged information will not operate as a waiver when ‘(1) the disclosure is inadvertent; (2) the holder of the privilege or protection took reasonable steps to prevent disclosure’”
Procedural preferences
On Social Security review he insists the ALJ explicitly articulate three things -- the combined effect of all impairments at Step Two, the specific reasons for not crediting a treating physician, and a function-by-function RFC -- and will remand for 'boilerplate' that prevents meaningful review.
“Such ‘boilerplate’ assertions do not suffice to demonstrate that the ALJ truly considered all of the evidence of record or considered the combined effect of Ridinger's impairments.”
Cautions
He applies the rules of evidence strictly to discovery motions and is unwilling to enjoin a non-party or interfere with a pending state-court case: 'common knowledge' is inadmissible hearsay, prior bad acts are propensity evidence, and the proper tool to secure a reluctant witness is a subpoena, not an abstract protective order.
“the only evidence of the agreements' chilling effect is the absence of evidence. This argument begs the question”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Ridinger's motion to reverse the final decision of the Commissioner is granted, the Commissioner's cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied, and the ALJ's decision denying Ridinger's claim for SSI benefits for the period prior to February 1, 2006, is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“For the reasons stated below, this Court denies in part and grants in part Defendants' Motion. This Court also denies in part Plaintiffs' Motion and withholds its ruling on the remainder of Plaintiffs' Motion until after Defendants comply with this Order.”
“For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for a Protective Order Related to Intimidation is denied.”
“For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that the Commissioner's position in the underlying litigation was not substantially justified and that the fees and costs requested by Plaintiff are reasonable. Therefore, the Court grants Plaintiff's request for attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $7,335.50 to be paid to Plaintiff.”
“For all these reasons, the Court finds that CIC has not carried its burden under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, and its motion for summary judgment [Dckt. 46] is denied as it relates to Defendant Gregory R. Brown.”
“For these reasons, Krukowski's motion for reconsideration [Dckt. 46] is granted. While the Court finds that its earlier order is correct under the allegations asserted in the First Amended Complaint, it amends its order to reflect a dismissal of the fraud claim without prejudice, thereby allowing its repleading in the Second Amended Complaint.”
“For all the reasons stated in this order, Krukowski has properly pleaded the fraud claim in her new complaint, and the Defendant's motion to dismiss [Dckt. 55] Count V of the Second Amended Complaint is denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted in its entirety, and Count I of the second amended complaint is dismissed insofar as it states causes of actions for retaliation, sexual harassment, and a hostile work environment.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 623 days (N = 2).
Ashman's docket combined consent cases he carried to final judgment under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) -- a steady stream of Social Security disability appeals among them -- with heavy pretrial discovery supervision and settlement-conference referrals from the district judges. The two durations below are from consent Social Security cases and are a tiny, selection-biased sample, not a random caseload median.
A historical record
Judge Ashman 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.