Victoria Ann Roberts

How Judge Roberts rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Roberts no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.

Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Position
District judge
Status
Retired 2023
Served
1998–2023
Appointed by
Bill Clinton (Democratic)
Commissioned
June 29, 1998
Education
University of Michigan (B.A., 1973); Northeastern University School of Law (J.D., 1977)
Signed orders read
15

About Judge Roberts

Victoria A. Roberts was a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Roberts received a commission on June 29, 1998. Judge Roberts assumed senior status on February 25, 2021 and retired on September 1, 2023.

How Judge Roberts decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

The court reversed where the bankruptcy ruling did not determine rent arrears, security-deposit offsets, or the debtor's abstention request.

“The Bankruptcy Court’s order does not take into account clear Michigan law”

Procedural preferences

The accident expert could not use undisclosed computer equations when the opposing party lacked a reasonable pretrial opportunity to test them.

“without providing the equations within a reasonable time before trial is unfair to Plaintiff.”

Cautions

The court treated claimed fingerprint-identification errors as matters for cross-examination and competing proof rather than categorical exclusion.

“go to the weight of the evidence and can be explored on cross-examination and/or through presentation of competing evidence.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Mobley v. City of Detroit
· 2013-01-11
Motion to certify interlocutory appeal (City of Detroit) Denied

“The City’s motion to certify that order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) is DENIED.”

Motion to stay proceedings (City of Detroit) Granted

“this case is stayed pending appeal by the individual officers.”

Iwanski v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. (In re Iwanski)
· 2012-02-02
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant John Robert Iwanski) Granted

“The Bankruptcy Court’s Order of May 26, 2011, is REVERSED. The matter is REMANDED for further proceedings.”

Lewis v. Drouillard
· 2011-03-04
Motions to dismiss (defendants UPS, Liberty Mutual, and Dr. Paul Drouillard) Granted

“Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

CBC Industries, Inc. v. Crosby Group, Inc.
· 2008-01-14
Summary judgment (defendant Crosby Group) Denied

“Defendant’s motion is DENIED.”

United States v. Stone
· 2012-01-25
Motion in limine for strictissimi juris standard (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ motion for application of the strictissimus juris standard and an instruction to the jury on strictissimus juris is DENIED.”

United States v. Stone
· 2012-01-25
Motion to exclude expert testimony (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ motion is DENIED without prejudice.”

Shapiro v. Merchants Bonding Co. (In re Wade)
· 2008-07-28
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant Merchants Bonding Company) Denied

“The Bankruptcy Court’s decision is AFFIRMED; MBC’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (Merchants Bonding Company) Denied
Strach v. Casino Windsor
· 2004-12-22
Motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (defendant Casino Windsor) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack .of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.”

Geisz v. Apfel
· 2000-03-14
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“GRANTS Plaintiffs, Motion for Summary Judgment [document 14]”

Summary judgment (Commissioner of Social Security) Denied

“DENIES the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment [document 15]”

Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“REMANDS this matter for an award of benefits.”

United States v. Nickens
· 2004-09-15
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s Motion to Suppress (Doc. #13) is DENIED.”

Abrams v. Mendsen
· 2003-10-20
Motion to preclude expert testimony (plaintiff Bryan Bennett Abrams) Granted in part

“the Court grants in part Plaintiffs Motion to Preclude Testimony of Defendants’ Accident Reconstruction Expert Henry Lipian.”

Westfield Insurance Co. v. Enterprise 522, LLC
· 2014-07-29
Motion for declaratory judgment (Enterprise 522 and Kearns Insurance Agency) Granted

“The Court GRANTS Enterprise’s and Kearns’ motion for declaratory judgment.”

Motion for declaratory judgment (Westfield Insurance Company) Denied

“Declaratory judgment in favor of Westfield is DENIED.”

Motion for summary judgment on fraud counterclaims (Westfield Insurance Company) Granted

“The Court GRANTS Westfield’s motion and DISMISSES Enterprise’s counterclaim of silent fraud and misrepresentation;”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Roberts carried a general civil and criminal trial docket and later served in senior status before retiring. The contested outcomes described here come from her published district-court opinions.

Pending matters in the official report

Judge Roberts was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2023.

Motions pending more than six months0
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years0
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Sep 202300
Mar 202302
Sep 202205
Mar 202213
Sep 202103
Mar 202104
Sep 202003

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.

A historical record

Judge Roberts no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.