Albert G. Schatz
How Judge Schatz decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He enforces statutes of repose/limitation to dispose of claims as a matter of law: a product-liability suit was barred by Nebraska's 10-year statute of repose even though the plaintiff's injury (renal failure) manifested only years after she stopped taking the drug. A plaintiff with a long-latency injury should expect the repose period (running from first sale/use) to be applied strictly; a defendant should raise it at summary judgment.
“This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion for summary judgment (Filing No. 16). ... the Court concludes that defendant's motion for summary judgment is well taken and should be granted.”
He reads merger-protection (ICC 'New York Dock') and similar regulatory conditions to compel arbitration -- treating the 'may be referred ... to arbitration' phrasing as mandatory, not permissive, and dismissing a court suit brought instead of arbitrating. A displaced employee with a New York Dock claim must arbitrate, not litigate, in the first instance.
“the Court concludes that defendant's motion to dismiss is well taken and should be granted.”
Procedural preferences
He applies the Anti-Injunction Act (26 U.S.C. 7421(a)) rigorously to bar suits seeking to restrain tax assessment/collection, requiring the plaintiff to satisfy the narrow Williams Packing exception (no possibility the government could prevail AND irreparable harm with no adequate legal remedy) before any injunction can issue. Tax-protester theories ('wages are not income') will not clear that bar.
“Since the judicial exceptions to the injunction bar of 26 U.S.C. 7421(a) are not satisfied in this case, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by these plaintiffs.”
On a Rule 12 motion supported by matters outside the pleadings he will convert it to summary judgment (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)) and, where a magistrate's report and recommendation is unopposed, adopt it after review. Counsel should respond to the affidavits accompanying a motion to dismiss and must file timely objections to a magistrate's R&R to preserve the point.
“Since materials outside the pleadings have been submitted for consideration by the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) the motions to dismiss must be treated as motions for summary judgment.”
Cautions
He dismisses suits against out-of-state defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction where the defendant itself has no contacts with Nebraska, emphasizing that it is the defendant's contacts with the forum -- not its contacts with a Nebraska resident -- that matter. A plaintiff suing a foreign defendant must plead the defendant's own purposeful availment of Nebraska, not merely its dealings with a local plaintiff.
“the Court finds that it lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant and that the complaint should be dismissed.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Motions to dismiss N = 3 |
Granted: 3 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 2 |
Granted: 2 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court adopts the recommendations of the magistrate and finds that defendants' motions to dismiss are well taken and should be granted.”
“Defendants collectively have filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. After careful review of the briefs and other documents filed in support of and in opposition to such motion, the Court concludes the motion is well taken and should be granted.”
“This matter is before the Court upon defendant Union Pacific Railroad's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Filing No. 14). ... the Court concludes that defendant's motion to dismiss is well taken and should be granted.”
“This matter comes on for determination with reference to defendant's motion for change of venue (Filing No. 6) and motion to dismiss (Filing No. 7). ... the Court finds that it lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant and that the complaint should be dismissed.”
“This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion for summary judgment (Filing No. 16). ... the Court concludes that defendant's motion for summary judgment is well taken and should be granted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Unavailable -- no docket dockets for this pre-PACER judge (see source). Caseload mix, terminated/pending counts, and case durations cannot be grounded.