Martin K. Reidinger
How Judge Reidinger decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Shook v. McNally, Reidinger granted summary judgment because the treatment delay showed at most negligence and the record did not connect the delay to additional injury.
“the Motions for Summary Judgment filed Defendants Charles J. McNally [Doc. 47] and Norma Biddix [Doc. 53] are GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Cautions
In Peters v. Aetna, Reidinger dismissed the civil-RICO counts with prejudice because the alleged enterprise lacked a structure independent of the defendants' ordinary commercial relationship, while allowing the ERISA fiduciary claims to proceed.
“OptumHealth Care Solutions, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. 37] ... [is] hereby GRANTED IN PART and Counts I and II of the Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the Defendants' Motions [Docs. 37, 39] are DENIED.”
In Jones v. Dismukes, Reidinger dismissed the habeas petition as untimely where the self-represented petitioner did not address the limitations issue or offer a basis for equitable tolling.
“The Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is GRANTED. ... The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“OptumHealth Care Solutions, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. 37] ... [is] hereby GRANTED IN PART and Counts I and II of the Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the Defendants' Motions [Docs. 37, 39] are DENIED.”
“the Motion of Defendants Aetna, Inc. and Aetna Life Insurance Company to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. 39] are hereby GRANTED IN PART and Counts I and II of the Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the Defendants' Motions [Docs. 37, 39] are DENIED.”
“The Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is GRANTED. ... The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED.”
“The Petitioner's renewed Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. 12] and his Motion to Dismiss his state charges and sentence [Doc. 13] are both DENIED as moot.”
“the Motions for Summary Judgment filed Defendants Charles J. McNally [Doc. 47] and Norma Biddix [Doc. 53] are GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 9] is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff”
“Motions to Dismiss [Docs. 12, 22] are DENIED”
“Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. 38] is”
“Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 40] is”
“Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 22] is GRANTED”
“the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the case is hereby REMANDED”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 25] is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 54 days (N = 9).
The sampled caseload includes a substantial number of self-represented prisoner civil-rights and habeas matters, along with False Claims Act, Administrative Procedure Act, insurance, and diversity cases. Several prisoner matters in the sample ended at initial review, while newer 2025-2026 filings include multiple insurance disputes removed from state court.
Put Judge Reidinger's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Reidinger actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Reidinger's own signed orders and cites them.