Jane Triche Milazzo

How Judge Milazzo rules, drawn from 30 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
Position
district
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
2011-10-12
Education
Nicholls State University, B.A., 1977; Louisiana State University (Paul M. Hebert Law Center), J.D., 1992
Signed orders read
30

How Judge Milazzo decides

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

What persuades

She polices subject-matter jurisdiction on her own motion: where a post-removal amendment adds non-diverse defendants and destroys complete diversity, she remands to state court even absent a pending motion.

“the Court finds that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned matter is REMANDED to the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson.”

Procedural preferences

Where a document central to the claim and attached to the motion shows the plaintiff sued the wrong party or otherwise cannot state a claim, she treats amendment as futile and dismisses with prejudice rather than granting leave.

“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is GRANTED. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Will set aside an entry of default when the delay was not willful, the movant acted promptly, no meaningful prejudice would result, and a potentially meritorious defense exists.

“the Court finds that the default was not willful, that Rogow acted quickly to remedy the default, that Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by setting aside the default, and that Rogow can present a meritorious defense.”

Cautions

Enforces Rule 9(b) particularity rigorously: she dismisses fraud and misrepresentation counts that merely re-label a failure-to-warn or contract theory in fraud language, while letting the core strict-liability and negligence claims proceed.

“the Motion is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART. The Motion is DENIED with respect to Counts I (Strict Products Liability Failure to Warn) and II (Negligence). ... the Motion is GRANTED with respect to Counts III (Negligent Misrepresentation), IV (Fraudulent Misrepresentation),”

Interlocutory certification is unavailable merely to revisit a discretionary pretrial ruling when reversal would not end the case, disagreement does not show a substantial legal split, and an appeal would add delay and complexity.

“Certification of an interlocutory appeal of this Court’s refusal to bifurcate trial as requested by Movants would have none of these benefits.”

Signed rulings

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

Washington v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company
2:23-cv-06300-JTM-JVM · 2024-07-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is GRANTED. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Snyder v. Bergeron
2:20-cv-02158-DMD · 2021-03-01
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Richard Neal is GRANTED and that the claims against Neal are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Mr. Mudbug, Inc. v. Bloomin' Brands, Inc.
2:15-cv-05265-JTM-KWR · 2018-01-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's open account claim is GRANTED with respect to the $21,879.00 billed for Magic Spice and the $116,981.20 of rejected product, and is DENIED in all other respects. ... Defendant's Motion as to Plaintiff's contract claim is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claim for breach of contract is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

Hartman v. Lafourche Parish Hospital Service District No. 1
2:16-cv-15467-JTM · 2017-08-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART. All of Plaintiff's claims under the ADA and LEDL are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED AS MOOT. Defendants' affirmative defenses of failure to mitigate, estoppel and waiver, and substantial control are DISMISSED AS MOOT.”

Trabelsi v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings
2:24-cv-00328-JTM-EJD · 2024-07-22

On sua sponte examination of subject-matter jurisdiction, Milazzo remanded the case after an amendment added two non-diverse Louisiana defendants and destroyed complete diversity. Quote: 'the Court finds that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned matter is REMANDED to the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson.'

Guy v. United States Department of Homeland Security
2:12-cv-02160-JTM-SS · 2014-03-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's Motion is GRANTED and Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

McManus v. Norwood
2:18-cv-00329-JTM-JCW · 2018-08-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' motions to dismiss are GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims in all consolidated cases are DISMISSED.”

Elerath v. Vitorino
2:18-cv-04058-JTM-DMD · 2019-04-02
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion is DENIED.”

In re Taxotere (Docetaxel) Eye Injury Products Liability Litigation
2:22-md-03023-JTM-MBN · 2022-12-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the Motion is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART. The Motion is DENIED with respect to Counts I (Strict Products Liability Failure to Warn) and II (Negligence). ... the Motion is GRANTED with respect to Counts III (Negligent Misrepresentation), IV (Fraudulent Misrepresentation), and V (Fraudulent Concealment).”

Shafirovich v. Saleh
2:24-cv-00238-JTM-KWR · 2024-12-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”

Shafirovich v. Saleh
2:24-cv-00238-JTM-KWR · 2026-03-26
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is DENIED.”

Petite v. Hinds
2:24-cv-02033-JTM-MBN · 2025-07-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median motion-to-ruling time: 58 days (N = 1).

From the enumerated 2020-2023 cases: a heavy criminal-docket line (United States v. Wade/Akpieyi/McGowan), a cluster of 'X v. United States' prisoner/FTCA suits (thin or no docket entries), and many Hurricane Ida first-party insurance cases (removed diversity: State Farm, GeoVera, Chubb, United Property & Casualty) that settle or remand quickly.

Draft for Judge Milazzo with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Milazzo, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Milazzo's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace