David Michael Lawson
How Judge Lawson rules, drawn from 53 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Lawson
David M. Lawson is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Lawson received a commission on June 2, 2000. Judge Lawson assumed senior status on August 6, 2021.
Judge Lawson's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Lawson, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Practice Guidelines ↗
- Criminal Trial Notice and Scheduling Order ↗
- Court's Standing Order Prescribing Sentencing Procedures ↗
- Exhibit List Form ↗
- Sample Notice to Appear for Case Management Status and Scheduling Conference ↗
- Sample Notice of Status and Scheduling Conference (for ERISA benefits case) ↗
- Sample Case Management and Scheduling Order ↗
- Sample Patent Case Management and Scheduling Order ↗
- Standing Order Requiring Submission of Information Regarding Removal Cases ↗
- Civil Jury Instructions Boiler Plate ↗
- Criminal Jury Instructions Boiler Plate ↗
Key rules
Conferences
The proposed Joint Final Pretrial Order must be submitted to Chambers, not e-filed, at least one week before the scheduled final pretrial conference date.
“The proposed Joint Final Pretrial Order must be submitted to Chambers, not e-filed, at least one week before the scheduled final pretrial conference date.”
Sealing
Whenever a motion to seal is filed, the movant shall submit a brief that states the particular reason the seal is required.
“Whenever a motion to seal is filed, the movant shall submit a brief that states the particular reason the seal is required.”
Trial
The parties are required to exchange proposed jury instructions before the final pretrial conference, and the attorneys must submit a stipulated set of instructions and proposed voir dire questions at least one week before the commencement of the trial.
“The parties are required to exchange proposed jury instructions before the final pretrial conference, and the attorneys must submit a stipulated set of instructions and proposed voir dire questions at least one week before the commencement of the trial.”
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 8, 2026).
- Procedures for Access, Service, and Management of Sealed Documents ↗
- Procedures for the Filing, Service and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Standing Order for Discovery and Inspection and Fixing Motion Cut-Off Date in Criminal Cases ↗
- Pro Se Filings (Revised & Amended) ↗
- Filing a New Civil Case or Civil Initiating Papers Under Seal ↗
How Judge Lawson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Davis v. People of the State of Michigan, he dismissed a Section 2254 petition for lack of jurisdiction because the challenged sentence had expired before filing and the remaining sex-offender registration obligation did not satisfy the statute's custody requirement.
“The petitioner is not ‘in custody’ within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). Therefore, the Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.”
In Menge v. LRIS, Lawson struck an amended complaint that materially differed from the proposed pleading for which he had granted leave. The filed version also attempted to add previously dismissed defendants without renewed permission.
“He did not file that amended pleading, and instead submitted an amended complaint that never was contemplated or evaluated by the Court or the other parties.”
Cautions
In Weiss, the court suppressed material seized from devices under warrants lacking Fourth Amendment particularity and held that later federal handling did not cure the defect. It separately declined to suppress cloud-account data obtained under a valid warrant.
“The search warrants authorizing the search of the various digital devices by the UMPD violated the Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement, and no later action by federal authorities erased their unconstitutionality.”
In Bason v. Village Square Consumer Housing Cooperative, Lawson granted both employers summary judgment on retaliation claims because the timing of the employee’s complaints did not itself establish causation and she offered no other connecting evidence. He left her other claims for trial.
“And Bason has offered no other evidence connecting the adverse actions to her complaints. The failure of proof on this element dooms her retaliation claim.”
In United States v. Fonville, Lawson suppressed three cell phones seized from a car because the agents lacked probable cause to arrest the defendant and thus could not justify the seizure as a search incident to arrest.
“The agents had no probable cause to arrest Fonville, and therefore they cannot justify the seizure of the three cell phones from his car as a valid warrantless search incident to an arrest.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“defendants Henry Ford Allegiance Hospital and Dr. Frank Lamarca's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28) is GRANTED.”
“recommending that the Court grant in part the defendants' motion to dismiss, dismiss the plaintiff's equal protection claim, and deny the plaintiff's motions for summary judgment”
“deny the plaintiff's motions for summary judgment”
“it is ORDERED that the defendants' motion to dismiss [dkt. #7] is DENIED.”
“it is ORDERED that the defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is DENIED.”
“the defendant's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 15) is GRANTED. The findings of the Commissioner are AFFIRMED.”
“Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant’s motion to dismiss [dkt. #4] is GRANTED IN PART.”
“Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint (ECF No. 37) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“It is further ORDERED that the motion to dismiss by defendant State of Michigan [dkt. #34] is GRANTED IN PART, and the plaintiff’s claim against the State for money damages is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“It is further ORDERED that the motion to dismiss by defendants City of Madison Heights [dkt. #20], and Oakland County Sixth Circuit Court [dkt. #21], and the motion for summary judgment by defendant City of Warren [dkt. #36] are GRANTED, and the complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE against those defendants.”
“Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the respondent’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED and that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“It is further ORDERED that the State of Michigan’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 7) is GRANTED, and the plaintiff’s claims against it are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“It is further ORDERED that the defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 25) is DENIED.”
“It is further ORDERED that the motion to dismiss by defendant City of Detroit (ECF No. 92) is GRANTED, and the plaintiff’s claims against that defendant are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed civil matters include prisoner civil-rights, employment, Social Security, and real-property disputes. This is a descriptive sample, not a complete caseload count.
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 | 40 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 1 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 20 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 40 | 20 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 13 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 9 |
| Sep 2023 | 3 | 15 |
| Mar 2023 | 2 | 19 |
| Sep 2022 | 8 | 25 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 21 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 19 |
| Mar 2021 | 19 | 19 |
| Sep 2020 | 4 | 18 |
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 Eastern District of Michigan, not for Judge Lawson: 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 | 2,926 | 8.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 410 | 2.9 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,246 | 4.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,252 | 15.3 months |
| Closed during trial | 18 | 35.8 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,926 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,615 | 7.9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,616 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,541 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,405 | 10.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,677 | 9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 3,237 | 8.6 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 Lawson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lawson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lawson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace