Sarah Evans Barker
How Judge Barker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On Eighth Amendment excessive-force summary judgment she denies the motion where contradicting accounts create genuine disputes about the necessity of force, while granting it on retaliation and as to officers not shown to be involved.
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. Dkt. [80]. The motion is granted as to all Defendants on the retaliation claim and granted as to Officer Blanton on the Eighth Amendment claims. The motion is denied as to the Eighth Amendment claims against Sgt. Poor and Officer Saxon.”
Procedural preferences
Treats a stipulated voluntary dismissal as self-executing and not a judicially sanctioned change in the parties' legal relationship, so a defendant is not a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees and the catalyst theory is rejected under Buckhannon.
“Defendants Stout and Ozkaya's Motion for Attorney's Fees [Dkt. 79] is DENIED.”
Cautions
On a Rule 41(a)(2) voluntary dismissal she attaches conditions as 'the quid for the quo' of avoiding res judicata, dismissing a futile copyright claim with prejudice while allowing state-law claims out without prejudice for refiling.
“Plaintiff's motion to dismiss is therefore GRANTED. Count I of the Amended Complaint, alleging copyright infringement, is dismissed WITH PREJUDICE; Counts II, III, and IV are dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. Dkt. [80]. The motion is granted as to all Defendants on the retaliation claim and granted as to Officer Blanton on the Eighth Amendment claims. The motion is denied as to the Eighth Amendment claims against Sgt. Poor and Officer Saxon.”
“As to Defendants Reagle, Alsip, Pfleeger, and Williams, summary judgment is granted as to all claims except those relating to the cleanliness of Plaintiff's cell and the showers in Pendleton's G-house during the time Plaintiff was housed there. The cleanliness claims will be resolved by a settlement or trial.”
“Plaintiff's motion to dismiss is therefore GRANTED. Count I of the Amended Complaint, alleging copyright infringement, is dismissed WITH PREJUDICE; Counts II, III, and IV are dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant's parallel motion to dismiss with prejudice [Docket No. 41] is thus granted as to Count I and denied as moot with respect to the other counts.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw Stipulated Dismissal [Dkt. 108] is DENIED.”
“Defendants Stout and Ozkaya's Motion for Attorney's Fees [Dkt. 79] is DENIED.”
“Mr. Singh's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted.”
“Mr. Carnine's Motion for Summary Judgment is therefore GRANTED.”
“the Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.”
“Defendant Chaleunphonh's motion for summary judgment, dkt. [42] is GRANTED”
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, dkt. [47] is DENIED.”
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment, dkt. [88], is granted.”
“Mr. Ivy's requests for preliminary injunction, dkts. [80], [86] are denied.”
“Mr. Ivy's motion to impose sanctions on the Defendants, dkt. [104], is denied.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Dkt. 77] is DENIED.”
“the Court hereby DENIES Mr. Reed's Motion to Dismiss.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 377.0 days (N = 8).
Put Judge Barker's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Barker actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Barker's own signed orders and cites them.