Lance Edward Walker
How Judge Walker rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Walker
Lance Edward Walker is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maine. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Walker received a commission on October 17, 2018.
Judge Walker's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Walker, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge Walker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In MacVicar’s wage suit, Walker denied dismissal after finding that allegations of inaccurate records, cash payments, and unpaid overtime plausibly supported a willful FLSA violation.
“MacVicar plead that Defendants did not keep accurate records, sometimes paid him and others in cash, and did not pay him for work in excess of 40 hours, all of which plausibly support the alleged FLSA violation being willful.”
In Maizah v. Abbott Laboratories, Walker compelled arbitration after finding that the employment dispute arose before the federal statute limiting forced arbitration of certain harassment claims became effective.
“Because the date of termination (December 31, 2021) preceded the effective date of the EFAA (March 3, 2022), the Arbitration Agreement is not invalidated by the EFAA.”
Procedural preferences
In Favreau's case, Walker dismissed two claims with prejudice after the plaintiff did not amend them to address defects previously identified when he allowed limited discovery and an opportunity to replead.
“Instead of dismissing Favreau's claims with prejudice, I exercised my discretion to dismiss the claims without prejudice, permitting 'some limited discovery.' ... To date, Favreau has not amended her Complaint to state plausible claims as to Counts I and II.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 15) is hereby AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED (ECF No. 12). This case is, accordingly, DISMISSED.”
“Accordingly, Lowe's second Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED. Counts I and II are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Based on the foregoing, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 20) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35) is GRANTED and the case is dismissed without prejudice.”
“Defendant York County Superior Court's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. The Maine Superior Court / York County Superior Court is DISMISSED from the case.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice (ECF No. 17) is GRANTED.”
“the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 27) ... [is] DENIED because there is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the Committee's decision to not offer Plaintiffs a long-term lease was motivated by improper considerations.”
“the Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 29) are DENIED because there is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the Committee's decision to not offer Plaintiffs a long-term lease was motivated by improper considerations.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Stay is DENIED (ECF No. 5).”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Default is DENIED (ECF No. 11). Plaintiff has more recently filed a motion to amend its pleadings, which I grant below. Consequently, the alleged default on the original complaint is moot.”
“Defendants’ Cross-Motion to Dismiss is RESERVED and the alternative request for an evidentiary hearing is GRANTED (ECF No. 12).”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend (ECF No. 23) is GRANTED over Defendants’ Objection (ECF No. 28)”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to Substitute (ECF No. 29) is DENIED on the current showing.”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 48) is DENIED and Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 50) is GRANTED.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s request for preliminary relief that restores his educational and work privileges (see ECF No. 32) is, accordingly, DENIED AS MOOT.”
“The Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff Ocean Farm Gear & Services LLC (ECF No. 3) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 67) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 64) is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Early-2021-filed cases on Walker's docket sampled here span civil-rights, employment, Social Security appeal, ERISA, foreclosure, and criminal matters: a typical mixed district-court caseload for a small state's single-judgeship-plus bench.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 1 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 3 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 1 | 3 |
| Sep 2025 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 4 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 2 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 5 | 1 |
| Sep 2020 | 6 | 1 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, not for Judge Walker: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 464 | 6.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 149 | 4.9 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 290 | 6.7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 22 | 20 months |
| Closed during trial | 3 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 464 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 409 | 8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 388 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2022 | 397 | 8.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 459 | 9.6 months |
| Sep 2020 | 390 | 8.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 506 | 7.8 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Walker with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Walker, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Walker's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace