Work with this judge in Ezel
Draft and get answers grounded in how Judge Cabell actually rules, cited to their own orders.
Draft a motion
Ask about Judge Cabell
Quick facts
Court U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Appointed by Judges of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Commissioned 2015-01-21
Education University of Massachusetts Amherst, B.A., 1986 (cum laude); Northeastern University School of Law, J.D., 1991
Signed orders read 25
Last updated 2026-07-09
Motion outcomes
Summary judgmentN = 8
counts only
3 1 4
Motions to compelN = 8
counts only
3 1 3 1
Motions to dismissN = 6
counts only
3 1 1 1
Motion for sanctionsN = 3
counts only
1 1 1
Social security appealN = 2
counts only
1 1
4 categories with a single ruling
Motion to vacateN = 1
counts only
1
Judgment on the pleadingsN = 1
counts only
1
Motion for reconsiderationN = 1
counts only
1
Motion for leave to amendN = 1
counts only
1
Counted from classified signed orders. A “1 of 1” is one ruling, not a tendency.
About this data
A free Ezel research resource. This profile is built from public records: the judge's own signed orders, public docket records, and published biographies. It is not legal advice and is not affiliated with the court.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
Smith, Jr. v. Egan & The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company, LLC
1:24-cv-11794-DLC · 2025-09-29
Motions to dismiss (defendant)
Denied
“For the foregoing reasons, ‘Defendant, Kenneth Egan’s Motion to Dismiss’ (D. 12) is DENIED.”
Banks v. Town of Plainville
1:18-cv-12084-DLC · 2020-12-11
Summary judgment (defendant)
Granted in part
“in favor of defendant James Floyd and the Town of Plainville. The complaint is accordingly dismissed against the Town of Plainville where it is named only in Count I. The motion is DENIED with respect to Counts II and III.”
Factory Mutual Insurance Company v. Skanska USA Building, Inc.
1:18-cv-11700-DLC · 2020-06-01
Summary judgment (defendant)
Denied
“For the foregoing reasons, the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (D.37) is DENIED.”
Ploss v. Massachusetts Department of State Police
1:23-cv-13236-DLC · 2025-03-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant)
Granted
“Counts II and III are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). Accordingly, the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint (D. 5) is ALLOWED.”
United States ex rel. Lokosky v. Acclarent, Inc.
1:11-cv-11217-DLC · 2023-05-10
Summary judgment (defendant)
Granted
“the court’s previous electronic order on this motion (Dkt. No. 148) is VACATED and Acclarent’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 125) is ALLOWED.”
Chatham v. Lewis & Canterbury Ventures, LLC
1:17-cv-11473-IT · 2019-09-12
Motion for partial summary judgment (defendant)
Denied
“the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the defendants Daniel J. Lewis and Canterbury Ventures, LLC’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 89) be DENIED.”
Renzi v. Azar
1:17-cv-11456-DLC · 2019-03-29
Summary judgment (plaintiff)
Denied
“the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment reversing the Secretary’s decision is DENIED”
Summary judgment (defendant)
Granted
“the Secretary’s motion for summary judgment affirming its decision is ALLOWED.”
Garnier v. United States of America
1:21-cv-10846-DLC · 2022-08-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant)
Granted
“The government’s motion to dismiss Count Four of the amended complaint is GRANTED.”
O'Leary v. New Hampshire Boring, Inc.
1:15-cv-12335-DLC · 2016-03-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant)
Granted in part
“the motion to dismiss is GRANTED with respect to Count Four against defendants Garside and Burne. The remainder of the motion to dismiss is DENIED.”
Furtado v. Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island
1:15-cv-13978-DLC · 2016-10-07
Motions to dismiss (defendant)
Granted
“the plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The plaintiff is given leave to file an amended complaint”
Elliston v. Wing Enterprises, Inc.
1:15-cv-11739-FDS · 2017-10-30
Motions to compel (defendant)
Denied
“the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff’s income tax returns is DENIED.”
Koppel v. Moses
1:20-cv-11479-LTS · 2022-11-08
Motions to compel (defendant)
Denied
“the motion to compel (D. 114) is DENIED without prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 1102 days (N = 2).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 310.5 days (N = 2).
Put Judge Cabell's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Cabell actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Draft a motion tuned to how Judge Cabell rules
Ask Ezel about Judge Cabell
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Cabell's own signed orders and cites them.