William T. Lawrence
How Judge Lawrence 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, liberal notice pleading + Iqbal/Twombly plausibility defeats a 12(b)(6); a plaintiff need not plead the precise legal/policy basis. He construes pro se complaints especially liberally and denies MTDs that demand premature factual or policy specificity.
“CCS's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's federal claims for failure to state a claim is DENIED in its entirety.”
On summary judgment in employment-discrimination cases he applies the 'convincing mosaic' standard -- circumstantial evidence (ambiguous comments, suspicious timing, replacement outside the protected class) that lets a jury infer discriminatory motive survives SJ.
“the evidence described above, if believed, would permit a jury to reasonably infer that age was a motivating factor in the Defendants' decision to terminate him. Therefore, the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED as to Jackson's ADEA claim.”
Procedural preferences
Strict, no-exceptions enforcement of the PLRA exhaustion requirement for prisoner suits; unexhausted claims are dismissed WITHOUT prejudice (so the prisoner may refile after exhausting, or as a non-prisoner). A recurring disposition given the heavy Terre Haute prisoner docket.
“Strict compliance is required with respect to exhaustion ... The PLRA's exhaustion requirement is not subject to either waiver by a court or futility or inadequacy exceptions.”
On habeas he applies AEDPA's 'doubly deferential' standard and the narrow 2255 savings-clause gateway for 2241; both 2254 and 2241 petitions in the sample were denied (one on Rule 4 face review). He also routinely declines a certificate of appealability when no reasonable jurist could debate the result.
“The standards created by Strickland and 2254(d) are both 'highly deferential,' and when the two apply in tandem, review is 'doubly' so.”
Cautions
Failing to respond to a dispositive motion is treated as conceding it -- he will not make the non-movant's argument for them. Respond to every MTD/MSJ.
“Jones' failure to respond to the motions to dismiss risked an adverse ruling. ... That risk has become a reality.”
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.
| Summary judgment N = 5 |
Granted: 3Granted in part: 1Denied: 1Moot / procedural: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 4 |
Granted: 1Denied: 3 | counts only |
| Habeas petition N = 2 |
Denied: 2 | counts only |
| Motions to strike N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion to appoint counsel N = 1 |
Denied: 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.
“Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 29) is GRANTED.”
“the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 75) is DENIED.”
“the Defendants' Motion to Strike (Docket No. 100) is DENIED but discovery is reopened to allow the Defendants to depose Dave Vanover and Becky Slusher.”
“the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 27) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“The defendants' motions to dismiss [19] and [27] are granted. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue.”
“The motion for summary judgment [dkt 31] is granted. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue.”
“His petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied because the petition shows on its face the Hughes is not entitled to the relief he seeks. ... Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue.”
“his petition for writ of habeas corpus must be denied and this action dismissed with prejudice. In addition, the court finds that a certificate of appealability should not issue.”
“Harper's motion to appoint counsel [dkt 18] is denied because he has adequately argued the procedural and substantive features of his claims and it is not in the interests of justice that counsel be appointed for him at this late chapter in the case.”
“CCS's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's federal claims for failure to state a claim is DENIED in its entirety.”
“Corizon's motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 28, is granted ... this lawsuit should not have been brought against Corizon and shall now be dismissed without prejudice as to Corizon.”
“Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on the merits, Dkt. No. 38, is denied as moot.”
“For the reasons explained above, the United States' motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 26, is denied.”
“the Court, having considered the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation as set forth in Docket Number 91 in its entirety. [R&R, Doc 91: 'the Magistrate Judge recommends that Economical's Motion be DENIED.']”