Mary Margaret Rowland
How Judge Rowland decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
At the pleading stage she takes the complaint's well-pleaded facts as true and will NOT resolve factual disputes — including whether a condition precedent was satisfied or whether the plaintiff materially breached. Arguments that ask her to credit the defendant's version of events over the complaint are rejected as premature.
“Accepting Defendants' version of the facts over the complaint's allegations is not appropriate at this pleading stage.”
In Social Security appeals she enforces the 'logical bridge' requirement strictly: the ALJ must give 'good reasons' for discounting a treating physician, may not cherry-pick the record, and may not 'play doctor.' A migraine found severe at step two but absent from the RFC, or a discounted claimant with a strong work history, draws a remand.
“the ALJ must identify the relevant evidence and build a 'logical bridge' between that evidence and the ultimate determination.”
Procedural preferences
When all federal claims are dismissed before trial she relinquishes supplemental jurisdiction over the pendent state-law claims rather than deciding them — seen in both Munn (MSJ) and Ambassador (MTD). Plan for state claims to return to state court, not be resolved federally, once the federal hook is gone.
“when a district court dismisses all of a plaintiff's federal claims, it should relinquish supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims rather than resolving them on the merits.”
Per her standing case-procedures page: motions are NOT noticed for presentment (on a contested motion she enters a minute order setting a hearing or briefing schedule); she does not accept courtesy copies; PDFs must be text-searchable from the original word file; hearings are in person by default. She also actively encourages substantive speaking roles for junior attorneys, expressly allowing more than one lawyer per side to argue or examine.
“Judge Rowland encourages attorneys and their clients to provide substantive speaking opportunities to less experienced attorneys ... Judge Rowland allows more than one attorney per side to speak during any proceeding.”
Cautions
Pro se complaints are construed liberally and she resists dismissing them on technical grounds (she rejected a 'shotgun pleading' attack on a pro se employment complaint). But liberal construction does not excuse the substance: a discrimination plaintiff must still plead the 'because of' causal link between the mistreatment and the protected characteristic, and unexhausted Title VII theories (e.g. color vs. race) are dismissed.
“It is the because of connection that Abubakar is missing here.”
Sec. 1983 substantive-due-process 'state-created danger' claims need conscience-shocking conduct — at least deliberate indifference (conscious disregard of a known danger). Inadvertent or even grossly negligent conduct (e.g. an unredacted FOIA disclosure done by mistake) is not enough, and there is no Monell municipal liability without an underlying constitutional violation.
“Only conduct falling toward the more culpable end of the spectrum shall be found to shock the conscience.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Motions to dismiss N = 4 |
Granted: 3Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 3 |
Granted: 2Denied: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted as to Counts I and II. Counts III through VII are dismissed without prejudice.”
“the Court grants Defendant's motion to dismiss [8] with prejudice.”
“For the stated reasons, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [30] is denied.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [16] is granted and the Commissioner's Motion [24] is denied.”
“the Commissioner's Motion [24] is denied.”
“this Court grants Defendants' motion to dismiss [51] the amended complaint [48]. This Court dismisses Count I with prejudice and declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Count II.”
“Walmart's partial motion to dismiss [20] is granted. Abubakar's claims for discrimination based on color, age, national origin, religion, and race are dismissed without prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 327.5 days (N = 16).
Active Eastern Division (Chicago) civil + criminal docket. Sampled nature-of-suit mix spans employment / civil rights (Title VII, Sec. 1983), prisoner civil rights, consumer (FCRA/TCPA), Schedule A IP-counterfeiting, product liability, contract/commercial, labor (FLSA), and Social Security appeals.