William Carleton Metcalf
How Judge Metcalf decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Industrial Services Group v. Farley, Metcalf recommended dismissal without prejudice on issue-preclusion grounds because the new allegations did not change the nature of the plaintiff's earlier action.
“recommending that the Defendants’ motion be granted on issue preclusion grounds, and this case be dismissed without prejudice ... the Court overrules the Plaintiff’s Objection and accepts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations ... the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 9] is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
Procedural preferences
In Venclauskas v. Hillman Beer, Metcalf concluded that the federal statute supplied the exclusive remedy up to the minimum wage, while parallel state-law tip claims could proceed for amounts above that threshold.
“recommending that the Court grant the Defendants’ Motion in part and deny the Defendants’ Motion in part ... the Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss Complaint [Doc. 20] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and Count III of the Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
Cautions
In employment retaliation cases, Metcalf requires the employee's complaint to identify discrimination or another practice covered by Title VII; a general defense of job performance or complaint of unfair treatment is not enough.
“Plaintiff has not alleged that she opposed discriminatory practices in the workplace or participated in an ongoing investigation or proceeding under Title VII. Significantly, neither the April 23 Chat Message nor the April 23 Email reference any discrimination ... Rather, both the April 23 Chat Message and April 23 Email focused on Plaintiff’s defense of her job performance.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Magistrate Judge entered a Memorandum and Recommendation, recommending that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss be denied ... the Defendants’ Objections ... are OVERRULED ... the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 25] is DENIED”
“recommended that the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment be granted because Plaintiff abandoned his claim and because there was no genuine issue for trial in any event ... Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 22] is GRANTED; and this action is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“recommending that the Defendants’ motion be granted on issue preclusion grounds, and this case be dismissed without prejudice ... the Court overrules the Plaintiff’s Objection and accepts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations ... the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 9] is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
“recommending that the Court grant the Defendants’ Motion in part and deny the Defendants’ Motion in part ... the Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss Complaint [Doc. 20] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and Count III of the Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“the Magistrate Judge issued a Memorandum and Recommendation, recommending that the Motion to Dismiss be granted in part and denied in part ... The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. 19] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is DENIED as to Counts III and X. The motion is GRANTED as to all other claims.”
“the Court accepts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that the Commissioner’s decision be vacated and that this case be remanded for further administrative proceedings ... the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and this case is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings consistent with this Order.”
“the Court overrules the Defendants’ Objection and accepts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss be granted in part and denied in part, and that this case be allowed to proceed ... the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and for Alternative Relief [Doc. 4] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and that the Plaintiff’s claim be allowed to proceed to the extent it is based on events that occurred after August 6, 2021.”
“the Court hereby accepts the Magistrate Judge’s amended recommendation regarding the pending motion ... the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss Defendant Shiflett’s Counterclaims [Doc. 11] is DENIED.”
“For the reasons set forth herein, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED.”
Put Judge Metcalf's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Metcalf actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Metcalf's own signed orders and cites them.