David Cleveland Joseph
How Judge Joseph decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On administrative-exhaustion challenges to employment claims, reads the EEOC charge generously: an unraised theory survives dismissal if it 'grew out of' the facts in the charge. Plead the facts; the precise label matters less.
“The Court views administrative charges in the “broadest reasonable sense.””
Procedural preferences
Polices subject-matter jurisdiction sua sponte and resolves it before the merits -- even before ruling on a pending summary-judgment motion. The party invoking the court's jurisdiction bears the burden, and an inadequately pleaded basis (seaman/vessel status, navigable water, or diversity citizenship/amount) gets the case dismissed.
“Although not raised by the parties ... the Court deems it necessary to determine subject matter jurisdiction before considering the merits of the Motion.”
Heavy use of the magistrate-judge referral system (Perez-Montes in Alexandria): most habeas/prisoner/Social-Security matters reach him as an R&R he adopts on de novo review; he recites that he reviewed the objections before adopting.
“after a de novo review of the record, including the Defendant’s Objection ... having determined that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are correct”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Motions to dismiss N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to remand N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for attorney fees N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for tro N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Habeas petition N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Social security appeal N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Concordia’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 6] is DENIED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Doc. 42] is DENIED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand [ECF No. 8] is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees [ECF No. 8] is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order enjoining Respondents from transferring him from LaSalle Correctional Center while his § 2241 Petition is pending is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] and the amended Petition [ECF No. 8] are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, WITH PREJUDICE, as to the jurisdictional issue, and WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the merits of Banks’ claim.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, and Hardwick’s appeal is DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”