Jerry Wayne Blackwell

United States District Court for the District of Minnesota Appointed by Joe Biden (Democratic) 4 signed orders read

How Judge Blackwell decides

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

Procedural preferences

Like the rest of the D. Minn. bench, Blackwell resolves much of his early-stage civil and criminal docket by adopting magistrate-judge R&Rs (Foster, Schultz, Micko all appear here). He reviews objected portions de novo and unobjected portions for clear error (D. Minn. LR 72.2(b)), and gives self-represented litigants' filings liberal construction. Objections that 'merely repeat arguments presented to and considered by a magistrate judge' draw only clear-error review, not de novo.

“objections to an R&R that 'are not specific but merely repeat arguments presented to and considered by a magistrate judge are not entitled to de novo review, but rather are reviewed for clear error'”

Blackwell enforces the Article III capacity rule strictly: a non-attorney parent cannot prosecute a minor child's federal claims pro se, and no amount of recharacterizing the objection ('preserving my own rights') saves the suit where the parent pleaded only the child's claims. He gives the litigant ample runway to find counsel first, then dismisses WITHOUT prejudice so the child's claims can be re-filed with a lawyer -- a remedy-preserving, not punitive, disposition.

“To pursue the claims asserted on her child's behalf in this matter, McCall must have counsel.”

In supervised-release / ISR suppression disputes he follows the Eighth Circuit's Kuhnel rule that a supervisee made aware of a search condition may be searched without reasonable suspicion, and he reinforces the holding with an alternative reasonable-suspicion finding -- belt-and-suspenders reasoning that insulates the ruling on appeal.

“The Eighth Circuit in Kuhnel plainly stated that suspicionless searches are permissible under conditions much like those imposed on Defendant, when the defendant had been made aware of such a condition.”

Motion outcomes

Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.

Motions to dismiss
N = 3
Granted: 2Moot / procedural: 1 counts only
Motion to suppress
N = 1
Denied: 1 counts only
Voluntary dismissal
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Motion for surreply
N = 1
Moot / procedural: 1 counts only

A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.

Signed rulings

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

Collins v. Fikes
0:22-cv-01320-JWB-DJF · 2023-05-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 25) is GRANTED; The Complaint (Doc. No. 9) is DISMISSED with prejudice”

Motion for surreply (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff's self-styled Sur-Reply/Motion (Doc. No. 38) is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Mullins v. Morgan
0:23-cv-01855-JWB-DTS · 2025-01-27
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants Dr. Morgan, Karin Parsons, and Rachel Wolfe's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 53) is GRANTED”

Voluntary dismissal (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Dr. Morgan from Count II (Doc. Nos. 76, 80) is GRANTED;”

McCall ex rel. J.W. v. Mathisen
0:25-cv-00419-JWB-DLM · 2025-12-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“Defendant Jonathan Mathisen's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 61) is DENIED AS MOOT.”

United States v. McClendon
0:24-cr-00037-JWB-DJF · 2024-10-09
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“Defendant's Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence (Doc. No. 14) is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Blackwell-assigned dockets confirmed via search_dockets (assigned_judge='Jerry W. Blackwell'), sampled 2026-06-03 (11-docket sample, not exhaustive). Nature-of-suit mix in the sample: ERISA (Keller v. North Memorial Health Care, 791), insurance (NRA of America v. Allianz Life, 110), TCPA (Schultz v. Realty Group; Abraham v. Diversified Adjustment, 485), civil rights / ADA accommodations (Alexander v. Olson Property Investments, 443; Scherer v. MSP Bloomington, 446), FLSA (Santiago v. UCare Minnesota, 710), personal property (Donahue v. Your Home Improvement, 380), and a wave of alien-detainee 28 U.S.C. 2241 habeas petitions tied to recent immigration enforcement (Beciraj v. Noem; Hoque v. Trump, 463). Representative terminated-case durations (filed -> terminated): Alexander v. Olson ~2021-03-31 to 2023-10-26 (~939d); Keller v. North Memorial ~2022-07-15 to 2024-01-25 (~559d); Schultz v. Realty Group ~2021-10-06 to 2023-03-14 (~524d); NRA v. Allianz ~2023-08-24 to 2024-08-12 (~354d). Habeas matters terminate fast (Hoque ~60d; Beciraj ~8d). Not exhaustive.