S. Allan Alexander
Judge Alexander no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Alexander decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Even where a treating physician's opinion favors the claimant, she will affirm a benefits denial if the ALJ's own weighing of the medical record -- not just a boilerplate recitation -- is thorough and internally consistent.
“the ALJ thoroughly analyzed plaintiff's credibility, including her statements concerning her inability to stand or walk for extended periods of time; his evaluation of plaintiff's testimony in light of the medical evidence of record led him to reduce plaintiff's RFC”
She reverses and remands, sometimes for an outright award of benefits rather than further proceedings, when an ALJ discounts a treating or examining physician's opinion without the detailed Newton-factor analysis required before doing so.
“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.”
On a genuine constitutional question she will look past a state statute's label (here, calling a remedy a 'lien') to its practical effect, and will strike a law facially rather than merely as applied when it lacks any alternative safeguard.
“The bottom line is that no matter what you call it, Section 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 a criminal detention/preliminary-hearing setting she moves quickly and denies continuances the government itself requests when the defense is ready to proceed.
“ORDER denying 7 Motion to Continue as to Paul Kevin Curtis (1) Signed by S. Allan Alexander on 4/19/13.”
Cautions
She will grant summary judgment against a pro se litigant's statutory petition (here, naturalization) when the agency's good-moral-character finding rests on an undisputed prior conviction, regardless of the litigant's equities.
“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.
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“The Commissioner's denial of benefits will be remanded for additional review in accordance with this opinion.”
“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.”
“the court concludes that the ALJ's opinion is supported by substantial evidence and should be affirmed.”
“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.”
“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 hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.