Donald Ellsworth Walter

How Judge Walter rules, drawn from 8 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
Position
district
Status
Senior status
Appointed by
Ronald Reagan (Republican)
Commissioned
1985-07-11
Education
B.A., Louisiana State University (1961); J.D., Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University (1964)
Signed orders read
8

How Judge Walter decides

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

What persuades

In employment-discrimination suits against state entities, holds Eleventh Amendment immunity bars the Section 1981/1983 damages claims while the surviving Title VII and Equal Pay Act claims fail on the merits for lack of a prima facie case.

“IT IS ORDERED that defendants’ motions for summary judgment, [Docs. ## 78, 79], be and are hereby GRANTED, and that Strong’s claims be and are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”

Procedural preferences

In Section 1983 First Amendment retaliation cases, holds a plaintiff who spoke pursuant to official duties is not protected under Garcetti and that a lateral transfer without loss of pay or title is not an adverse employment action.

“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #34] is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiffs claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Cautions

Enforces strict pre-suit PLRA exhaustion, dismissing a prisoner suit filed before administrative remedies were complete with prejudice to refiling in forma pauperis as a deterrent.

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 24) is granted and Plaintiffs complaint dismissed with prejudice to its refiling in forma pauperis.”

Signed rulings

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

Strong v. Grambling State University
· 2015-03-25
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that defendants’ motions for summary judgment, [Docs. ## 78, 79], be and are hereby GRANTED, and that Strong’s claims be and are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Coker v. Whittington
· 2016-03-14
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #34] is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Rayborn v. Bossier Parish School System
· 2016-07-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #34] is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiffs claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Cryer v. United States
· 2008-05-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Government’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and plaintiffs claims are DISMISSED.”

Gillet v. Anderson
· 2008-08-03
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 17) is denied.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 24) is granted and Plaintiffs complaint dismissed with prejudice to its refiling in forma pauperis.”

Hovhannisyan v. Jackson Parish Correctional Center
3:26-cv-00167 · 2026-02-25
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that to the extent Petitioner Mihrdat Hovhannisyan seeks release under Zadvydas, his Petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to his right to re-file the claim should his confinement become unconstitutional. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's claims concerning his conditions of confinement and medical care are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE here but WITHOUT PREJUDICE to his right to raise them in a separate civil rights action. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's claim that the Government failed to afford him a bond hearing and claim under the Administrative Procedure Act is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Hovhannisyan v. Jackson Parish Correctional Center
3:26-cv-01071-DEW-KDM · 2026-08-10
Habeas petition (petitioner) Moot / procedural

“IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner Mihrdat Hovhannisyan’s Petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.”

Diaz v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
6:26-cv-01168-DEW-KDM · 2026-08-10

Walter adopted an unopposed recommendation and dismissed the habeas case without prejudice after the petitioner failed to file the amendment required by an earlier order. The adopted recommendation applied Rule 41(b) sua sponte, so this signed disposition is retained for context but excluded from party-motion statistics.

Draft for Judge Walter with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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