David Clay Bramlette III
How Judge Bramlette rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Bramlette
David C. Bramlette is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. Appointed by President George H.W. Bush, Judge Bramlette received a commission on November 25, 1991. Judge Bramlette assumed senior status on March 20, 2006.
Judge Bramlette's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Bramlette'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 Bramlette decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Zurich American Insurance Co. v. R.E.M. Directional, he deferred the duty-to-defend ruling until the underlying arbitration could supply relevant facts, denied both summary-judgment motions without prejudice, and stayed the indemnity question.
“the court finds that it should defer its ruling on whether there was an occurrence under the policy until after the arbitration proceeding ... is complete, because that proceeding may reveal additional admissible facts relevant to the duty to defend.”
In an FCA qui tam suit, he applies the first-to-file jurisdictional bar broadly, comparing the material elements of fraud alleged in the relator's complaint against an earlier-filed nationwide case rather than requiring the two complaints to be factually identical, and separately holds relators to Rule 9(b)'s particularity requirement for the underlying false claim.
“Based on the substantial overlap in material facts underlying these alleged schemes, the Court finds that the complaints are sufficiently ‘related’ for purposes of the first-to-file bar.”
In an employment-discrimination summary-judgment ruling, he credits an employer's documented, specific performance criticisms as a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason and requires the plaintiff to rebut them with more than his own inconsistent or unsupported deposition testimony.
“The Court concludes that Plaintiff's assertions of pretext and race discrimination fail for a lack of evidence. Taken together, it is the Court's view that these assertions are the product of unfounded suspicion and groundless presumptions.”
Procedural preferences
In a habeas case, he adopted Magistrate Judge Parker's report and recommendation, denied the petition, and dismissed the action with prejudice.
“This Court adopts Magistrate Judge Parker's Report and Recommendation and DENIES the Petition [Doc. 1] and DISMISSES the action WITH PREJUDICE.”
In a pro se prisoner case, he dismissed the claims against six named defendants with prejudice as frivolous.
“the claims against Defendants Adams County Sheriff Department, State of Mississippi, Adams County, Deselle Davis, Latanya Renee Mackel, and Shane Doherty are dismissed with prejudice as frivolous.”
In Reed v. Pike County DA Office, Bramlette adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissed the remaining claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute after mail to Reed was twice returned undeliverable and he did not provide an updated address.
“A pro se prisoner's failure to inform a court of his change of address ... indicates a failure to meet his obligation to press forward with the litigation and failure to prosecute his case expeditiously.”
In Myers v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mississippi, Bramlette denied remand. He held that the plan's required statement that a participant may sue in state or federal court did not waive the insurer's right to remove the benefits case to federal court.
“The language in the disclosure statement does not compel a finding of waiver of the defendant's right to remove.”
In Sampson v. Mississippi Valley Silica Co., Bramlette remanded a wrongful death action after concluding that the insurer's removal was more than one year after the action began. He found insufficient evidence that the plaintiffs joined the insurer late in bad faith to defeat removal.
“the Court cannot conclude that the plaintiffs’ late joinder of Lamorak was orchestrated in bad faith to defeat removal.”
In the reviewed Rodriguez habeas case, he dismissed without prejudice after repeated orders to identify the custodian and explain noncompliance drew no response.
“Dismissal without prejudice is warranted.”
In the reviewed Mukhamedov detention case, he adopted an unobjected magistrate recommendation and treated the petitioner’s removal as mooting the habeas petition.
“Mukhamedov’s removal mooted these proceedings. The Court agrees.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant R.E.M. Directional, Inc.'s motion for partial summary judgment (docket entry 15) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;”
“FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Zurich American Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment (docket entry 25) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“FURTHER ORDERED that defendant R.E.M. Directional, Inc.'s motion to stay proceedings as to plaintiff's indemnity obligations pending outcome of underlying action (docket entry 17) is GRANTED;”
“FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment (docket entry 25) filed by Management & Training Corporation, Warden Frank Shaw, Deputy Warden Gabriel Walker, and Deputy Warden Tira Jackson is GRANTED;”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Lincare's Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 15) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. FURTHER ORDERED that Count I of Relator's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (docket entry 1) is DENIED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that ... Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Continue Forma Pauperis Status [16] should be, and is hereby, granted to the extent it is a motion to voluntarily dismiss this case. The remainder is denied. This case is dismissed without prejudice.”
“FURTHER ORDERED that all claims Plaintiff Casey Shelton Woods asserts under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Parker's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 10] is ADOPTED; the Petition [Doc. 1] is DENIED; and the action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Birdie's Motion for Conditional Certification is GRANTED, and that a collective class consisting of all Direct Support Professionals, or Direct Care Professionals, employed by Defendants Brandi's Hope Community Services, LLC, and Danny Cowart who stayed with a client overnight at any time since February 24, 2014, is conditionally certified;”
“FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 26] is GRANTED, and Plaintiff Raymond Keith Thomas's Complaint [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the claims against Defendants Adams County Sheriff Department, State of Mississippi, Adams County, Deselle Davis, Latanya Renee Mackel, and Shane Doherty are dismissed with prejudice as frivolous. ... The remainder of this case shall proceed.”
“FURTHER ORDERED that Timothy Blalock is DISMISSED from this action WITH PREJUDICE; FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Timothy Blalock (docket entry 33) is DENIED AS MOOT;”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The 2021-2024 sample included entries whose available text could not support outcome quotations. In the 20 late-2025 assigned dockets checked in this refresh, many petitions ended by voluntary dismissal or remained pending; four complete signed district orders supported procedural outcomes. The older sample and recent cohort are selected slices, not a caseload distribution.
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 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 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 Southern District of Mississippi, not for Judge Bramlette: 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 | 1,034 | 9.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 613 | 8.4 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 385 | 9.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 26 | 21 months |
| Closed during trial | 10 | 21.5 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,034 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 988 | 8.7 months |
| Sep 2023 | 972 | 11 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,139 | 11.9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,061 | 11.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,605 | 7.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,094 | 9.3 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 Bramlette with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Bramlette, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Bramlette's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace