S. Allan Alexander

How Judge Alexander rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
Position
Magistrate judge
Status
Left this court 2016
Served
1994–2016
Commissioned
1994
Education
B.A., William Woods College (1973); J.D., University of Mississippi School of Law (1978)
Signed orders read
19

About Judge Alexander

S. Allan Alexander served as a United States magistrate judge for the Northern District of Mississippi from 1994 until her retirement in September 2016. She earned a law degree from the University of Mississippi and previously clerked for District Judge William C. Keady.

How Judge Alexander decides

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

What persuades

In Lenoir v. Colvin, she affirmed a benefits denial after finding that the ALJ had examined the claimant's credibility, treatment records, and clinical evidence in reaching a supported residual-capacity assessment.

“The ALJ performed a thorough analysis of the plaintiff’s impairments”

In Blue v. Commissioner of Social Security, Alexander reversed a benefits denial after finding that the administrative law judge favored a nonexamining physician over treating and examining physicians and made unsupported medical judgments in the residual capacity assessment. Because she found the evidence of disability conclusive, she remanded solely to calculate benefits.

“the ALJ improperly relied upon the opinion of a non-examining reviewing physician instead of affording proper weight to the opinions of the treating and examining physicians ... This case is remanded for the sole purpose of determining the amount of benefits to be awarded to the plaintiff under the Act.”

In Noatex Corp. v. King Construction of Houston, LLC, she treated Mississippi's stop notice procedure as a prejudgment attachment because it froze a contractor's funds, and held the statute facially unconstitutional for lacking procedural safeguards.

“The bottom line is that no matter what you call it, § 85-7-181 has the exact same effect as an attachment — immobilizing the contractor’s property for an indeterminate period of time to secure payment to a subcontractor.”

Procedural preferences

In United States v. Curtis, Alexander denied the government's motion to continue the preliminary and detention hearings scheduled for April 19, 2013.

“ORDER denying 7 Motion to Continue as to Paul Kevin Curtis (1)Signed by S. Allan Alexander on 4/19/13. (wsm)”

Cautions

In Obad v. Rodriguez, she granted the government's summary judgment motion on a naturalization petition after holding that the applicant could not deny the premise of his earlier guilty plea and had not offered sufficient evidence of good moral character.

“After reviewing the motions and briefs, the court concludes that defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED.”

Signed rulings

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

Long v. Commissioner of Social Security
3:15-cv-00005 · 2015-09-29
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“the court concludes that the ALJ's decision was not supported by substantial evidence and did not apply the proper legal standards. The decision of the Commissioner is reversed, and the case will be remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.”

Glass v. Commissioner of Social Security
3:15-cv-00014 · 2015-11-06
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“the court concludes that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the proper legal standards. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed, and the case is closed.”

Jordan v. Commissioner of Social Security
4:15-cv-00026 · 2015-11-16
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“the court concludes that the ALJ's decision was not supported by substantial evidence and failed to the proper legal standards. The Commissioner's decision is reversed, and the case will be remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.”

Huey v. Commissioner of Social Security
4:15-cv-00037 · 2015-12-04
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“the court concludes that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the proper legal standards. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed, and the case is closed.”

Blue v. Commissioner of Social Security
1:15-cv-00129 · 2016-04-12
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“the decision of the ALJ is not supported by substantial evidence and did not uphold proper legal standards. This case is remanded for the sole purpose of determining the amount of benefits to be awarded to the plaintiff under the Act.”

Ewing v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
3:15-cv-00153 · 2016-04-29
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“the court concludes that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the proper legal standards. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed, and the case is closed.”

Spells v. Colvin
3:15-cv-00147 · 2016-05-09
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“the court finds that the ALJ improperly discounted the opinion of Dr. Jacinto DeBorja, which resulted in a flawed RFC. Finding further that an award of benefits is proper, the court remands the case for a determination of benefits.”

Gibson o/b/o M.A.M.G. v. Colvin
3:15-cv-00155 · 2016-06-02
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“The Commissioner's denial of benefits will be remanded for additional review in accordance with this opinion.”

Rowe v. Commissioner of Social Security
3:15-cv-00193 · 2016-07-01
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“the decision of the ALJ was not supported by substantial evidence and did not apply proper legal standards. The decision of the Commissioner is reversed, and the case will be remanded for further evaluation consistent with this opinion.”

Lindsey v. Colvin
4:15-cv-00160 · 2016-06-27
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“the court concludes that the ALJ's opinion is supported by substantial evidence and should be affirmed.”

Taylor v. Commissioner of Social Security
3:15-cv-00171 · 2016-06-17
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“the ALJ's decision was not supported by substantial evidence. The case is remanded to obtain a consultative examination and an opinion as to the extent that plaintiff's limitations impede his ability to perform work related functions.”

Taylor v. Commissioner of Social Security
3:15-cv-00221 · 2016-07-26
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“the court concludes that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the proper legal standards. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed, and the case is closed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 250 days (N = 17).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 4.5 days (N = 4).

  • Across her 1994-2016 tenure her enumerated docket was dominated by consent-jurisdiction Social Security disability appeals, diversity contract and personal-injury cases, employment and civil-rights suits, and a steady stream of felony initial appearances and detention hearings referred to her as the Oxford-based magistrate.
  • In her final two years alone she decided at least 17 Social Security appeals to final judgment.

A historical record

Judge Alexander 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.