Scott D. Johnson
How Judge Johnson rules, drawn from 44 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Johnson
Scott D. Johnson has served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Middle District of Louisiana since February 2020. He earned a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1993. Before joining the court, he served in the Marine Corps, practiced law privately, and worked for Louisiana's Division of Administration.
Judge Johnson's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Johnson, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Contacting chambers
Email confidential position papers and status updates only when directed by the court or chambers staff.
“For submission of confidential position papers and status updates as directed by the Court or chambers staff only. Any document submitted shall be attached in PDF format and formatted in accordance with the Local Rules. All other requests or submissions not directed by the Court or chambers staff are not permitted.”
Filing
Email proposed orders in editable word-processing format in addition to attaching them to the electronically filed motion.
“While proposed orders must be submitted as the last page of the electronically filed motion or submitted as an attachment to the electronically filed motion, proposed orders must also be e-mailed in an editable word processing format, preferably Microsoft Word, to the appropriate District Judge or Magistrate Judge.”
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 Johnson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In the intervention order, each proposed intervenor had to establish its own diversity jurisdiction; the original parties’ amount in controversy did not cure an intervenor’s smaller claim.
“Even where the claims in the underlying lawsuit satisfy the amount in controversy requirement, the intervenor claims must independently satisfy the amount in controversy requirement.”
In the mortgage dismissal recommendation, new claims in an opposition could not replace the complaint. Pleading changes need to be presented through an amended complaint.
“Plaintiffs cannot amend the Complaint through their Opposition.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“It is recommended that the Motion for Summary Judgment (R. Doc. 19) be granted, dismissing all of Plaintiff’s claims against all Defendants. It is further recommended that the Court decline the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction in connection with any potential state law claims, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice.”
“It is recommended that the Motion for Summary Judgment (R. Doc. 41) be granted, dismissing Plaintiff’s remaining claims, with prejudice, and that this action be closed.”
“It is the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (R. Doc. 24) be granted, in part, and Plaintiff’s claims asserted against Defendants LeBlanc and Vannoy be dismissed, with prejudice. It is further recommended that Plaintiff’s claim for compensatory damages be dismissed, with prejudice. Finally, it is further recommended that in all other regards the Motion be denied and that this matter be referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings herein.”
“It is recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion (R. Doc. 11) be denied. It is further recommended that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure of Plaintiff to serve the defendants as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Motions to Appoint Counsel (R. Docs. 2 and 11) are DENIED.”
“Plaintiff’s cause of action should be deemed dismissed without prejudice and closed.”
Johnson recommended sua sponte remand of a pro se-removed state eviction proceeding. Under the well-pleaded-complaint rule, a federal defense does not create removal jurisdiction; all parties were Louisiana citizens, defeating diversity; and the removal statute is not an appellate route for a state-court loser.
Sua sponte show-cause / Rule 4(m) & Local Rule 41(b) dismissal for failure to serve (no party motion, so it is excluded). Notable: applied the HEIGHTENED Millan 'clear record of delay or contumacious conduct' standard because dismissal without prejudice would effectively be with prejudice (limitations bar), then dismissed anyway given the pro se plaintiff's total inaction.
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on behalf of Jason Kent, Keith Turner, Dewey Phillips, and Cherryl Washington, be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; Parker’s claims against Dewey Phillips and Parker’s claims regarding the conditions of confinement in administrative segregation and regarding not being provided his medications should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to Parker’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e.”
“the undersigned recommends the motion be granted in part and denied in part.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction be declined, that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Unknown Kelly and Unknown Lollis be GRANTED, and that Taylor’s claims against Kelly and Lollis be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Because Defendants’ Notice of Removal was not timely under § 1446(b)(3)... Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand should be granted.”
“RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s request for sanctions be DENIED.”
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 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, not for Judge Johnson: 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 | 1,130 | 13.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 185 | 14.7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 924 | 13.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 15 | 25.7 months |
| Closed during trial | 6 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,130 | 13.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,251 | 9.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 801 | 10.2 months |
| Sep 2022 | 732 | 14.9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 843 | 18.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,041 | 24 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,007 | 13.3 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 Johnson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Johnson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Johnson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace