W. Allen Pepper Jr.
Judge Pepper no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Pepper decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Pepper denied judgment on the pleadings where the complaint, read in the plaintiff's favor, stated a viable claim.
“when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the Amended Complaint states a valid claim for relief”
Pepper granted summary judgment where bankruptcy nondisclosure triggered judicial estoppel after the court considered material outside the pleadings.
“the defendant’s motion, converted to a motion for summary judgment, should be granted because the plaintiffs claims are barred by the judicial estoppel doctrine.”
Procedural preferences
Pepper emphasized the demanding standard governing dismissal at the pleading stage.
“Motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) are viewed with disfavor and are rarely granted.”
Pepper treated abandoned constitutional theories as moot when the parties did not develop them in briefing.
“the parties do not discuss this claim specifically in their briefs. The court will therefore treat this particular claim as abandoned and moot.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand [3-1] is hereby DENIED;”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [68-1] is GRANTED;”
“Defendants’ Motion to Supplement [48-1] and Motion for Reconsideration [55-1] are DENIED AS MOOT;”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint is DENIED;”
“the court concludes that Plaintiffs Motion to Remand [8-1] should be denied.”
“the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment [7-1] should be denied”
“the defendant’s motion for summary judgment [12-1] should be granted.”
“Baptist Memorial Hospital — Desoto, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment [82— 1] is DENIED;”
“Coresource, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss [35-1] is GRANTED;”
“Novasys Health Network, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment [85-1] is GRANTED;”
“American Heritage’s motion for summary judgment should be granted and the plaintiffs claims against American Heritage should be dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Court finds that the defendants’ motions are well-taken and should be granted.”
“The defendants’ motion to strike the plaintiffs jury demand is therefore granted.”
“Monsanto’s motion for summary judgment on the Scruggses’ conversion claim is well-taken and should be granted.”
“Motion for Summary Judgment on All Counts [70-1] as to the pacemaker-company defendants is hereby GRANTED;”
“The plaintiffs Motion to Remand is, therefore, denied.”
“the Court finds that defendants’ Motion(s) to Dismiss should be denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Five sampled historical case records were terminated, but none retained a chronological entry stream; no docket-motion or timing conclusions are drawn.
A historical record
Judge Pepper 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.