George Jarrod Hazel
How Judge Hazel rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Hazel no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Hazel decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Bliss, Hazel tested the proposed policy reading against the distinction between accidental-death and life insurance coverage.
“Under Mrs. Bliss’ interpretation, almost any death would be an accident, and the Court would effectively transform this accidental death benefit into a life insurance policy.”
In Wanrong Lin, Hazel applied all four preliminary-injunction factors before preserving the petitioner’s presence during review.
“All four factors weigh in favor of granting a preliminary injunction here.”
In Kravitz, Hazel treated newly discovered evidence as substantial enough to warrant an indicative ruling during appeal.
“Because an appeal is pending and this Court only retains limited jurisdiction over a Rule 60(b) motion, Plaintiffs also requested that the Court ‘issue an indicative ruling under Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1 stating that a Rule 60(b) motion raises a substantial issue or would be granted.’”
Procedural preferences
In Randolph, Hazel required a clear record and narrowly tailored limits before restricting communications with collective-action members.
“[A]n order limiting communications between parties and potential class members should be based on a clear record and specific findings that reflect a weighing of the need for a limitation and the potential interference with the rights of the parties.”
In Wilder, Hazel considered the complete evidentiary record even while identifying a better recording practice.
“Although it may be better practice to record the Miranda warnings when possible, in evaluating the testimony of all relevant witnesses, and the existence of a signed Advice of Rights form, the Court finds that the Miranda warnings were given despite the fact that it was not recorded.”
In Fromer Chiropractic, Hazel used a stay to coordinate judicial review with an agency question within the FCC’s expertise.
“The doctrine of primary jurisdiction ‘is a doctrine specifically applicable to claims properly cognizable in court that contain some issue within the special competence of an administrative agency.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons above, the Court will grant the Government’s request for stay of this proceeding until the conclusion of the related State murder trial of Arnold Johnson in Prince George’s County, Maryland, which is scheduled to begin July 14, 2015.”
“For the aforementioned reasons, the Order from the Bankruptcy Court is AFFIRMED.”
“The Bankruptcy Court’s dismissal of the complaint is AFFIRMED.”
“For the reasons stated above, National Union’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 9) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiffs-Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED;”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Protective Order is GRANTED;”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Invalidate Opt-Out Forms is GRANTED;”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions is DENIED.”
“For the reasons stated, Defendant Ujoatuonu's Amended Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 14, shall be treated as a Motion for Summary Judgment and is granted.”
“For the reasons explained above, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, ECF Nos. 6 & 10, are DENIED.”
“Defendants’ request to transfer the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, ECF No. 10 at 8, is also DENIED.”
“Petitioners' Motion for a preliminary injunction, ECF No. 15, is granted.”
“For the foregoing reasons, on June 19, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion for an Indicative Ruling Under *403Rule 62.1(a), finding Plaintiffs' Rule 60(b) Motion raises a substantial issue.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the EEOC’s Motions, ECF Nos, 9 & 11, are GRANTED.”
“Additionally, Dimensions Healthcare’s Motion to Strike, ECF No. 18, is GRANTED.”
“For the reasons stated, the Court denies Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Count Two of the Indictment.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Order of the Bankruptcy Court is affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 238.5 days (N = 10).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 55 days (N = 8).
The fixed sample of ten terminated historical cases included three habeas matters, two prisoner civil-rights matters, and one each involving fraud, banking, medical malpractice, employment, and administrative review.
A historical record
Judge Hazel no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.