Justin T. Quinn
How Judge Quinn rules, drawn from 27 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Quinn
Justin T. Quinn has served as a United States magistrate judge for the District of New Jersey in Trenton since May 29, 2024. Before joining the bench, he clerked for U.S. District Judge Esther Salas and practiced at Robinson Miller LLC.
Judge Quinn's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Quinn, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
Obtain leave before filing formal motions, subject to the order’s stated exceptions.
“formal motions shall not be filed without prior leave from this Court.”
Conferences
Request an adjournment at least two business days before a scheduled conference.
“Adjournment requests shall only be considered if made at least two (2) business days prior to a scheduled conference.”
Conferences
Request a deadline extension at least two business days before the deadline.
“Requests for extensions of time shall only be considered if made at least two (2) business days prior to a scheduled deadline.”
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).
- Second Amended Standing Order 2026-02: In Re Increase in Immigration-Related Habeas Corpus Petitions seeking Emergent Relief ↗
- Standing Order 2025-05: IN RE Procedures for Access to and Service of Sealed Documents ↗
- Standing Order 2025-04: IN RE "Schedule A" Cases ↗
- Standing Order 2024-03: In re: Amendment to Procedures for Requesting, Filing, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents and Guidance for Same ↗
- Standing Order 2024-02: Electronic Signatures ↗
How Judge Quinn decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In BFI Waste Systems v. Township of Monroe, Quinn allowed the deposition of the township's mayor after finding that the mayor had personal involvement in the landfill events at issue and relevant first hand knowledge.
“Doing the same here, the Court finds that the Mayor did have personal involvement in underlying events and, therefore, has knowledge relevant to this case.”
In Khal Anshei Tallymawr v. Township of Toms River, Quinn granted a protective order against subpoenas seeking years of officials’ personal emails and social media records. He found the requests insufficiently relevant to the asserted discrimination and unduly burdensome in scope.
“It is the Court’s duty to prevent efforts to obtain irrelevant and unduly burdensome discovery, which is exactly what is at issue in the instant motions.”
Procedural preferences
In Khal Anshei Tallymawr v. Township of Toms River, Quinn reminded the parties that the local discovery meet and confer rule required meaningful discussion aimed at resolving disputes without court intervention. He addressed that requirement while deciding the subpoena dispute.
“This is not simply a box-checking exercise; the Parties are required to engage in robust, meaningful discussions with the intention of resolving the disputed issues without the intervention of the Court.”
In Khal Anshei Tallymawr v. Township of Toms River, Quinn reduced a fee request after finding much of counsel’s block billed time too vague to assess. He awarded $29,750 after reducing the requested rate and compensable hours.
“the Court is unable to make a reasonable determination regarding much of counsel’s time... the undersigned cannot 'determine if the hours claimed are unreasonable.'”
In Moses v. Wayfair, Quinn denied a request to exclude late T-Mobile records because they were relevant, the delay resulted partly from the plaintiff's noncompliance and an inadvertent mistake, and the plaintiff showed no prejudice.
“because the T-Mobile Records (1) are clearly relevant, (2) were only obtained untimely due to Plaintiff’s own noncompliance and an inadvertent mistake, and (3) cause no prejudice to Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s request to preclude the T-Mobile Records is denied.”
He required a concrete showing before pausing civil discovery because of a parallel criminal case, leaving specific Fifth Amendment issues for case-by-case resolution.
“Their generalized concerns regarding parallel proceedings therefore do not establish that judicial economy would be served by suspending this action.”
Cautions
In Price v. County of Salem, Quinn denied reconsideration of a discovery ruling after finding the plaintiffs repeated arguments he had already rejected. He also found their later expert report did not qualify as new evidence supporting reconsideration.
“a motion seeking reconsideration may not be used by a party to 'restate arguments that the court has already considered.'”
In A.T. v. Freehold Regional High School District Board of Education, Quinn denied the district's request for independent medical examinations without prejudice because it had not shown those examinations were needed before reviewing the student's medical records.
“Furthermore, it is unclear whether an IME is necessary at all as Defendant has yet to review A.T.’s medical records.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDERED that Respondents’ motion to quash [ECF No. 7] is DENIED”
“the Court will enter a protective Order, preventing Plaintiffs from obtaining the information sought in the 19 Subpoenas.”
“ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 109) is DENIED”
“ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to compel [ECF No. 43] is GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that the motion to intervene [ECF No. 17] is GRANTED”
“RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s Complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Compel an Independent Medical Examination of A.T. (ECF Nos. 54, 62) is DENIED without prejudice”
“ORDERED that Defendant’s Motions to Compel Medical Records (ECF Nos. 54, 62) is GRANTED”
“ORDERED that the Third Parties’ Motion to Quash (ECF No. 61) is GRANTED”
“ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion to Compel (ECF No. 73) is DENIED”
“Plaintiffs’ thin cross-motion is denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees is granted in part for the amount of $29,750.00 for 70 hours of work at an hourly rate of $425.”
“ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the Complaint [ECF No. 30] is DENIED”
“ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 55) is GRANTED”
“ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Approve his Application for Pre-Approval of Pro Bono Services [ECF No. 194] is DENIED”
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 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 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 District of New Jersey, not for Judge Quinn: 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 | 8,970 | 8.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 370 | 4.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,266 | 5.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 2,317 | 14.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 17 | 36.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 8,970 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,921 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 8,378 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2022 | 7,053 | 7.9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 9,064 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 9,031 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 10,590 | 9 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 Quinn with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Quinn, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Quinn's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace