James Donald Maxwell II
How Judge Maxwell rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Maxwell
James Donald Maxwell, II is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Maxwell received a commission on December 18, 2025.
Judge Maxwell's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Maxwell's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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 Maxwell decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Enforces an arbitration agreement when the signed application clearly incorporates the agreement and delegates questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator.
“Because the arbitration agreement delegates gateway issues of arbitrability to an arbitrator, the Court need not decide which of Smith's claims are subject to arbitration.”
Treats standing as a threshold jurisdictional requirement and requires the plaintiff to identify a personal injury rather than assert the rights of others.
“the complaining party—Leflore County and Youth Court Judge James Littleton, in his official capacity—is not the alleged injured party”
At the pleading stage, allows claims involving disputed, fact-intensive eligibility or limitations questions to proceed when the complaint presents a plausible version of the controlling facts.
“whether the referenced orders ultimately substantiate South Delta's eligibility for the credit presents a fact-intensive issue appropriately addressed through discovery or at summary judgment”
Procedural preferences
Analyzes requests to revisit an interlocutory order under Rule 54(b), while looking to the considerations used for final-judgment reconsideration.
“Because the Court's previous order compelling arbitration was an interlocutory order, Rule 54(b) is more appropriate.”
Does not treat a plaintiff's loss on a difficult immunity question, standing alone, as proof that the suit was frivolous or that counsel acted sanctionably.
“neither counsel's procedural missteps nor the fact that the Plaintiffs' claims proved unsuccessful are, in themselves, justifications to impose sanctions.”
Cautions
Requires strict compliance with the notice and factual-showing requirements for emergency injunctive relief.
“His failure to explain to this Court why notice should not be required is fatal to his TRO request.”
Warns that repeated filings containing fictitious legal authorities may lead to monetary, fee, or dismissal sanctions.
“Should Smith submit any pleadings with further citations to false legal authorities, he will face sanctions against him—up to and including monetary penalties, defendants' attorney fees, and dismissal of this action.”
For emergency relief involving a repossessed vehicle, requires a showing that damages cannot repair the injury; transportation hardship alone did not establish irreparable harm in the reviewed case.
“Walker has not demonstrated that losing the Telluride is an irreparable injury.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The motion to dismiss for lack of standing is GRANTED.”
“But the motion for imposition of sanctions is DENIED.”
“The Motion for Emergency Hearing filed in Cause Number 4:25-cv-186-JDM-JMV [186-5] and the Motion for Emergency Hearing filed in Cause Number 4:25-cv-187-JDM-JMV [187-7] are both DISMISSED.”
“For these reasons, TD Auto Finance LLC's Motion [7] is GRANTED.”
“For these reasons, Smith's Motion for Reconsideration [38] is DENIED.”
The court adopted the recommendation and dismissed the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a federal claim.
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice after it failed to state a plausible claim or establish federal jurisdiction and the plaintiff did not answer a show-cause order.
“That this petition will be transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi”
The court adopted the recommendation and dismissed the complaint with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim, while warning that further frivolous filings could lead to sanctions.
“For these reasons, Fulmer's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [7] is DENIED.”
“For these reasons, Fulmer's Renewed Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [13] is DENIED.”
The court dismissed the action with prejudice because the short complaint was frivolous, failed to state a claim, and did not establish federal jurisdiction.
The court remanded a removed traffic-citation proceeding because the notice established no federal-question, diversity, or civil-rights-removal jurisdiction.
“The United States Rule 12(b)(1) [12] motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The United States Rule 12(b)(6) [12] motion is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 48.5 days (N = 6).
The early assignment set includes civil-rights and employment cases, consumer and insurance disputes, habeas and prisoner matters, Social Security appeals, and commercial litigation.
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 | 0 |
| 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 | 0 |
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 Northern District of Mississippi, not for Judge Maxwell: 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 | 563 | 7.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 121 | 2.8 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 199 | 4.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 242 | 11.8 months |
| Closed during trial | 1 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 563 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 734 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 761 | 5.7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 640 | 10.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 592 | 10.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 633 | 9.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 567 | 9 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 Maxwell with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Maxwell, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Maxwell's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace