Terry Alvin Doughty
How Judge Doughty decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In multi-state suits challenging federal agency mandates he has granted preliminary injunctions where the plaintiff States showed a likelihood of success on the merits (often on statutory-authority or APA grounds) together with the other Rule 65 factors.
“Finding that the Government Defendants do not have the authority to implement the CMS Mandate, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 2] and IMMEDIATELY ENJOINS and RESTRAINS the Government Defendants from implementing the CMS Mandate.”
Procedural preferences
He enforces service-of-process requirements: a plaintiff who fails to properly serve the defendant, even after a magistrate judge's warning, has the complaint dismissed under Rule 12(b)(5).
“For the foregoing reasons, Cleco's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 12] is GRANTED, and Gray's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
Cautions
Under the ADA Amendments Act he construes "disability" broadly and denies an employer summary judgment where a reasonable jury could find the employee disabled, so ADAAA defendants should not expect an easy exit at summary judgment.
“For the reasons set forth, Mid South's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 25] is DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons set forth above, FEMA's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and LCP's claims against it are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the reasons set forth, Mid South's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 25] is DENIED.”
“Accordingly, LC's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 21] is GRANTED. Aguillard's religious discrimination and retaliation claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the following reasons, Defendants' motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction [Doc. No. 26] filed by Defendants Alex Azar, II and Seema Verma, is GRANTED-IN-PART, as to each Plaintiff”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 28] filed by Palmetto GBA, L.L.C., is DENIED, as moot.”
“Having considered the pleadings, the record, the applicable laws, evidence, and oral arguments of counsel, for the reasons set forth herein, this Court finds Plaintiff States have satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction. Accordingly, Plaintiff States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED.”
“Finding that the Government Defendants do not have the authority to implement the CMS Mandate, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 2] and IMMEDIATELY ENJOINS and RESTRAINS the Government Defendants from implementing the CMS Mandate.”
“IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 10] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“JUDGMENT granting in part and denying in part 10 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying Plaintiffs' request for class action certification. Signed by Judge Terry A Doughty on 7/4/2023.”
“the motion is GRANTED. The claims for breach of contract are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and to the extent Wade seeks to assert them, she is compelled to do so in arbitration.”
“Wade's claims based in negligence (Count 2 and part of Count 4) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and to the extent Counts 1 and 4 cover conduct prior to January 21, 2016, those Claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Cleco's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 12] is GRANTED, and Gray's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“MEMORANDUM ORDER granting 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying as moot 6 Motion for TRO and 7 Amended Motion for TRO. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, the Administration for Children and Families, and the Office of Head Start, along with their Secretary, directors, administrators, and employees are hereby ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from implementing the Head Start Mandate set forth in 86 Fed. Reg. 68052 (November 30, 2021), as to all Head Start staff, volunteers, contractors, students, and all others covered by said Head Start Mandate. Signed by Judge Terry A Doughty on 1/1/2022.”
“Because the scope of the Preliminary Injunction includes Louisiana and Ohio, the pending Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Brick and Trenn is moot. ... IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 4] filed By Brick and Trenn is DENIED AS MOOT.”
Put Judge Doughty's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Doughty actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Doughty's own signed orders and cites them.