Ivan L. R. Lemelle
How Judge Lemelle rules, drawn from 35 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Lemelle
Ivan L. R. Lemelle is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Lemelle received a commission on April 7, 1998. Judge Lemelle assumed senior status on June 29, 2015.
Judge Lemelle's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Lemelle's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge Lemelle decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a seaman injury case, the employer’s admission that crew members acted within the scope of employment remained binding when it already had the facts it later cited as grounds for withdrawal.
“Terral had access to the factual information which it claims would have led it to deny the request for admission”
A maintenance-and-cure forfeiture defense failed where the identified rule violation and alleged intoxication were not shown to cause the injury.
“Even if the Court were to consider Vandenboom’s alleged intoxication at the time of the accident, there is no evidence that his intoxication caused his injuries.”
In Hammler, he held that an employee who requested leave just before her first work anniversary could state an FMLA interference claim because eligibility attached during approved leave and termination denied restoration.
“Although her request came four days before her one-year anniversary, eligibility is determined as of the date leave begins, and any FMLA-qualifying leave taken after the employee reaches twelve months of employment is FMLA leave.”
Procedural preferences
Allowed a late opposition despite carelessness where the record showed no bad faith and upcoming deadlines left room for a reply.
“The record also does not suggest that Terral has acted in bad faith.”
In Tidewater, the court kept a dispute before the bankruptcy court despite related noncore insurance claims because the bankruptcy court could submit proposed findings and its existing schedule avoided delay.
“Maintaining the reference permits the proceeding to continue under the schedule already”
Cautions
In McKinley, the court granted dismissal for failure to prosecute after repeated missed discovery obligations and unanswered motions. It separately granted summary judgment when the plaintiff produced no evidence rebutting the employer’s stated reasons.
“McKinley has failed to identify any evidence demonstrating that SCI’s stated reasons were pretextual.”
In Main Pass, he found that an oil-spill removal-cost claim omitted an allegation that response activities complied with the National Contingency Plan and allowed an amended complaint within 14 days.
“Anadarko has not pled that its actions were consistent with the NCP.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. No. 20) be and is hereby DENIED.”
“For these reasons Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“defendant's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Axis' Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 105) is denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendants motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) is DENIED, for the reasons stated below.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion for status conference (Rec. Doc. 41) is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED and defendants' second defense is dismissed.”
“Granted in part to allow natural persons with usufructuary or trust beneficiary interests to become owners and/or operators of residential STRs; and denied concerning juridical corporate entities seeking the same status”
“Granted insofar as she has shown a Takings Clause violation of a fundamental right to retain her STR permits until their expressed expiration dates”
“Denied concerning restrictions against natural persons who are usufructuaries and trust beneficiaries.”
“IT IS ORDERED that ACL's Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED without prejudice.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED for the reasons stated in the Court's prior Order and Reasons.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Certification for an Interlocutory Appeal Under 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) is GRANTED.”
“defendant Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company's Motion for Summary Judgment on Bad Faith Claims (Rec. Doc. 39), Motion to Exclude Experts (Rec. Doc. 41), Motion to Strike (Rec. Doc. 44), and Motion to Continue Trial and Reset Pretrial Deadlines (Rec. Doc. 45) are DISMISSED AS MOOT.”
“Motion to Exclude Experts (Rec. Doc. 41), Motion to Strike (Rec. Doc. 44), and Motion to Continue Trial and Reset Pretrial Deadlines (Rec. Doc. 45) are DISMISSED AS MOOT.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
A broad New Orleans civil and criminal docket: maritime and marine personal injury (Jones Act, 28:1333), diversity property-insurance suits (many 2022 Hurricane-Ida claims against State Farm, Allstate and surplus-lines carriers), product-liability diversity (Monsanto, General Motors), Section 1983 civil-rights and prisoner-civil-rights suits, Section 2254 state habeas petitions, ERISA and FLSA employment matters, Social Security review, contract disputes, and criminal prosecutions and post-conviction motions.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, not for Judge Lemelle: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 10,411 | 79.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 3,511 | 86.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,814 | 14.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 4,062 | 86.8 months |
| Closed during trial | 24 | 23.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 10,411 | 79.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 6,506 | 10.7 months |
| Sep 2023 | 6,610 | 24.2 months |
| Sep 2022 | 8,635 | 69.4 months |
| Sep 2021 | 11,535 | 24.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 16,631 | 36 months |
| Sep 2019 | 9,196 | 10.3 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Lemelle with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lemelle, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lemelle's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace