Charles Ralph Simpson III
How Judge Simpson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a criminal civil-rights prosecution over the manner of a fatal search-warrant execution, the judge required the government to trace an officer's specific use of force to the alleged constitutional violation as its legal cause -- when a co-occupant's gunfire, not the defendant's own shots, provoked the fatal return fire, that intervening act broke the chain of causation the felony charge required.
“K.W.'s opening fire became the proximate, i.e., the legal, cause of Taylor's death because that exercise of lethal force usurped control over the circumstances and directly led to Taylor's fatal wounding by drawing return fire.”
On a fraudulent-joinder-style privity question, the judge holds affiliated corporations at arm's length from one another absent specific factual allegations of dominance and injustice -- shared branding or a common parent is not enough to pierce the corporate veil at the pleading stage.
“Blue Spirits' argument falls flat because it did not plead any factual allegations to support a corporate veil piercing claim, nor did its Amended Complaint contemplate same.”
In discrimination cases, the judge treats a plaintiff's own deposition testimony as capable of foreclosing a claim outright -- when a plaintiff testifies that a claim's framing (here, race) does not reflect her actual grievance, that testimony operates as an admission the claim does not exist, regardless of how the complaint was pleaded.
“White's testimony shows that she has abandoned her race-based claims. Also, by failing to respond to Defendants' argument, she waived her opposition to it.”
Procedural preferences
The judge holds firmly to the presumption against severing jointly indicted conspiracy defendants; a defendant seeking a separate trial must point to concrete, timeline-specific prejudice rather than a general assertion that evidence against co-defendants might spill over.
“Without more evidence of 'substantial,' 'undue' or 'compelling prejudice' to his defense within the appropriate timeframe, these conclusory assertions offered by I. Reyes are insufficient to overcome the presumption against severance in this case.”
On a request for a preliminary injunction seeking affirmative relief (rather than merely preserving the status quo), the judge applies extra scrutiny beyond the usual four-factor test, and will not order a change to prison medical policy on a movant's own unsupported say-so.
“Motions seeking to obtain affirmative preliminary injunctive relief must be more closely scrutinized than the already-disfavored motion for preliminary injunction which seeks to maintain the status quo.”
An eleventh-hour, one-sentence request for leave to amend tucked into a response brief, without a proposed amended pleading attached, does not count as a real motion the judge will consider on its own terms.
“it is well-settled that 'a request for leave to amend[,] almost as an aside, to the district court in a memorandum in opposition to the defendant's motion to dismiss is . . . not a motion to amend.'”
Cautions
The judge accepted the government's own correction of the trial record as sufficient basis to dismiss an indictment with prejudice and order a defendant's immediate release, without demanding further briefing once the prosecution acknowledged the problem.
“The Indictment DN 3 and Superseding Indictment DN 25 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for the reasons stated in the Notice of Filing to Correct the Record DN 40. James Hickman III shall be RELEASED FROM CUSTODY FORTHWITH.”
The judge dismisses claims filed years after a defendant's role in the alleged wrongdoing was discovered, applying the statute of limitations strictly even against the government's own delayed corporate-affiliate identification.
“As such, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Lt. Norris' Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART in that all claims against him, except the tort of outrage, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant Kyle Meany's Partial Motion to Dismiss Count 1 (DN 33) is GRANTED. The final sentence of Count One of the Indictment is hereby STRICKEN and the felony charges against defendant Meany as found in Count One of the Indictment are hereby by DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“Defendant Kyle Meany's Motion to Dismiss Count 4 (DN 34) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Joshua Jaynes' Motion to Dismiss Count I (DN 35) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. To the extent Jaynes seeks dismissal of the felony changes in Count One, his Motion (DN 35) is GRANTED but to the extent that he seeks complete dismissal of Count One, his Motion (DN 35) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Joshua Jaynes' Motion to Dismiss Count II (DN 36) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Joshua Jaynes' Motion to Dismiss Count III (DN 37) is DENIED.”
“Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (DN 61 and DN 62) are GRANTED. The final sentence of Count One of the Superseding Indictment is hereby STRICKEN and the felony charges against defendants Jaynes and Meany are hereby by DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“The Court hereby GRANTS the Government's motion. The Indictment and Superseding Indictment on file in the above-captioned case are hereby dismissed with prejudice as against both defendants, Joshua Jaynes and Kyle Meany.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Ishia Reyes's Motion to Sever (DN 123) is DENIED.”
“Defendants' Motion to dismiss, DN 24, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: 1. The Motion is GRANTED as to Counts I, II, III, VII, IX, and X of the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and those Counts are DISMISSED as to all Defendants. a. Counts I, II, III, and IX are dismissed without prejudice. b. Counts VII and X are dismissed with prejudice.”
“Blue Spirits' perfunctory 'Alternative Motion' for leave to amend its Amended Complaint, DN 29-2, is DENIED.”
“Because Defendants have shown that White lacks sufficient proof of elements necessary to her claims and because White has failed to carry her burden of proof in opposition to those Rule 56 arguments, the Court will grant Defendants' summary judgment Motion (DN 29) and enter a judgment in their favor as to all claims by White.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion (DN 6) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff A.N.A.'s Motion for Class Certification 70 is GRANTED”
“Plaintiff J.J.N.'s Motion for Class Certification is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Two subclasses, as set forth, are certified for purposes of this litigation.”
“MEMORANDUM OPINON AND ORDER by Senior Judge Charles R. Simpson, III adopting 22 Report and Recommendations and objections are overrruled; certificate of appealability is DENIED; separate judgment will be entered”
“Because the Court finds that Reid has failed to make a prima facie showing that Defendants are amenable to service of process under Kentucky's long-arm statute, she has failed to make a necessary showing for the Court to exercise personal jurisdiction over Defendants... For these reasons, the Court will grant Defendants' motion by separate order.”
“Stanley's complaint does not state a claim for retaliation under the KCRA that is plausible on its face. Therefore, the Court will grant Haier's motion to dismiss.”
“the motion of the defendants, Green Hills Ventures, LLC, et al., to dismiss (DN 5) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled dockets spanned commercial contract and coal-mine wage-and-hour litigation, employment discrimination and FMLA disputes, insurance and consumer-debt disputes, Social Security appeals, defamation, prisoner civil-rights suits, and federal criminal prosecutions including drug and firearms charges as well as the Breonna Taylor-related civil-rights case. Several sampled cases ended in settlement, voluntary dismissal, or reassignment to another judge rather than a contested ruling by this judge, consistent with a broad general civil and criminal docket.
Put Judge Simpson's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Simpson actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Simpson's own signed orders and cites them.