Claria Horn Boom

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky (jointly appointed to the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky) district Appointed by Donald Trump (Republican) 11 signed orders read

How Judge Boom decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On Title VII employment claims she conducts a rigorous, evidence-focused McDonnell Douglas analysis and grants the defense summary judgment where documented performance problems predate the protected activity (defeating causation) and the plaintiff points to no pretext evidence.

“The Secretary's Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 48] is GRANTED.”

Procedural preferences

She will not rule on summary judgment before adequate discovery: she denies a defendant's motion filed before the Rule 26(f) conference as premature, treating a Rule 56(d) request made in the opposition brief as sufficient rather than exalting form over substance.

“The Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 6] filed by Defendants Baptist Healthcare System, Inc. ... is DENIED without prejudice.”

In an insurance-coverage action overlapping state liability proceedings, Boom exercised the court's discretion to decline declaratory-judgment jurisdiction and dismissed without prejudice.

“the Court will exercise its broad discretion to decline jurisdiction over this matter under the Declaratory Judgment Act.”

Cautions

Boom vigorously enforces the firm presumption against extending Bivens: applying the Ziglar/Egbert two-step she treats prisoner excessive-force as a new Bivens context and grants dismissal where any 'single reason to pause' (the PLRA, the BOP grievance program, the FTCA, prison-administration deference) counsels against a damages remedy.

“Defendant Sams's motion to dismiss, [R. 19], is GRANTED. ... Gardner's complaint, which asserts an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendant Sams, [R. 1], is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

A state attorney general's general, contingent, or discretionary authority is insufficient for an Ex parte Young suit without a concrete enforcement connection to the challenged statute.

“Any enforcement authority allocated to Defendant pursuant to K.R.S. §§ 15.020, 15.190, and 15.200 is both contingent and discretionary, and Plaintiff nowhere alleges that that Defendant will exercise that contingent, discretionary authority here.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Gardner v. Sams
6:24-cv-00079-CHB
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Sams's motion to dismiss, [R. 19], is GRANTED. ... Gardner's complaint, which asserts an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendant Sams, [R. 1], is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

Mills v. Baptist Health Corbin
6:23-cv-00150-CHB-HAI
Summary judgment (defendant) Moot / procedural

“The Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 6] filed by Defendants Baptist Healthcare System, Inc. ... is DENIED without prejudice.”

Dillworth v. Wormuth (Secretary of the Army)
3:20-cv-00629-CHB-LLK
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The Secretary's Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 48] is GRANTED.”

Miller v. Batson
3:20-cv-00310 · 2025-09-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Batson, Best, and Louisville Metro, [R. 99], is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Wilson, [R. 101], is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Schroll v. Wilson
6:22-cv-00145 · 2025-07-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants Wilson, Braden, Young, and Berry's Motion for Summary Judgment, [R. 48], is GRANTED.”

McIlwain v. Berry
3:23-cv-00130 · 2025-08-01
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant Berry's Motion to Dismiss, [R. 68], is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. Arcline Elevation Services Holdings, LLC
6:25-cv-00167 · 2026-04-29
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“Defendants Brandon and Junior Smith's Motions to Dismiss, [R. 6], [R. 7], are DENIED as moot.”

Alabdulaziz v. Tindall
3:26-cv-00178 · 2026-04-10
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, [R. 1], is DENIED.”

Wigginton v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
3:26-cv-00035 · 2026-06-29
Motion for temporary restraining order (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order, [R. 2], is DENIED.”

Ford v. Bondi
3:25-cv-00063-CHB · 2026-05-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“Defendant Attorney General Russell Coleman's Motion to Dismiss, [R. 4], is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Attorney General Russell Coleman's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, [R. 10], is GRANTED.”

Nationwide Assurance Co. v. CO Apartments LLC
3:25-cv-00769-CHB · 2026-04-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Peggy Miles's Motion to Dismiss, [R. 10], is GRANTED.”

Default judgment (plaintiffs) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment, [R. 22], is DENIED as moot.”

Put Judge Boom's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Boom actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Boom's own signed orders and cites them.