Nan R. Nolan
Judge Nolan no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Nolan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In electronic discovery she will order targeted backup-tape and outside-counsel searches when the record shows a party tried to make communications undiscoverable -- evidence of an email-destruction policy converts an otherwise disproportionate request into a justified one.
“Defendants provide compelling justification for a limited search of the Cravath backup tapes, which the Court will permit.”
Procedural preferences
On Social Security review she applies the substantial-evidence standard and remands where the ALJ fails to build an 'accurate and logical bridge' from the evidence to the conclusion -- here, by stopping at step four without asking the vocational expert whether the claimant's past job exists at the lighter level he could perform.
“On this record, the ALJ’s conclusion that Mr. Robinson can perform his past relevant work is not supported by substantial evidence.”
She holds securities-fraud plaintiffs to the heightened PSLRA/Tellabs scienter-pleading standard and will dismiss a Rule 10b-5 claim that does not allege a cogent and compelling inference of scienter -- but ordinarily dismisses with leave to amend under Rule 15.
“Therefore, Count I is dismissed with leave to amend.”
Cautions
She disfavors using a protective order to block a deposition on competency grounds: under Rule 601 every person is presumed competent, and a witness's difficulty remembering or communicating is a matter of weight for the jury, not a bar to being deposed.
“Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, all persons are presumed competent to testify.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is granted, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 21] is denied. Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the ALJ's decision is reversed, and this case is remanded to the Administration for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“Defendants M. Scott Gills, Joseph R. Shalleck, and Leroy J. Mergy (hereinafter collectively referred to as ‘Defendants’) move to compel non-party Huron Consulting Services LLC’s (‘Huron’) compliance with a subpoena (Doc. 92). For the following reasons, Defendants’ motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part.”
“For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted in part. ... Plaintiff fails to sufficiently allege scienter, a required element of a valid Rule 10b-5 claim. Therefore, Count I is dismissed with leave to amend.”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Protective Order to Preclude the Deposition of Sarah Sauer [Doc. 108] is DENIED. Sarah Sauer is ORDERED to appear forthwith for her deposition.”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [30] is granted in part and denied in part. The claims against Defendants Bloomington Pavilion, LLC and Meisels Family Limited Partnership in Count III are dismissed.”
“Defendants' Motion to Strike [58] is granted in part and denied in part.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 43] and Morgan's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 45] are both granted in part and denied in part.”
“After considering the parties written and oral arguments on this matter, the Court finds that the settlement meets the good faith requirement of the Joint Tortfeasor Contribution Act (740 ILCS 100/2(e)) and grants the Estate's Motion [# 26].”
“As described above, and in the concurrently filed Order, Plaintiffs' Motion for Discovery Sanctions Against Defendants [Doc. 459] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiffs' request for fees and costs is denied without prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 357 days (N = 2).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 131 days (N = 1).
Nolan's docket combined two streams: full consent cases she carried to final judgment under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) -- Social Security disability appeals and civil matters including securities -- and a large volume of pretrial discovery supervision in cases referred to her by district judges, where she became a nationally recognized e-discovery authority. The durations below are drawn from two of her contested consent merits cases and are a tiny, selection-biased sample of her hardest-fought matters, not a random caseload median.
A historical record
Judge Nolan 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.