Stephan M. Vidmar
How Judge Vidmar rules, drawn from 4 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Vidmar no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Vidmar
Stephan M. Vidmar served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of New Mexico until his retirement in January 2023. He previously served as a New Mexico state district judge and later as a special master. His federal work included civil referrals and consent cases in the Las Cruces division.
How Judge Vidmar decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Benjamin v. Jackson, Vidmar found that the plaintiff had failed to exhaust administrative remedies for his claims against Lawrence Artiaga and Michael Hohman.
“Judge Vidmar found that Plaintiff Bernest Benjamin had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as to his claims against Lawrence Artiaga and Michael Hohman.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“In the PFRD, the Honorable Stephan M. Vidmar, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended granting the Defendants' 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss No. IV: Dismissal of Count Eight of Plaintiff's Complaint Alleging Violation of Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment Right to Due Process ... the Defendants' 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss No. IV ... is granted; and ... Count VIII of the Complaint ... is dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Honorable Stephan M. Vidmar, United States Magistrate Judge, construed the Martinez Report on Behalf of Defendants Artiaga and Hohman ... as a motion for summary judgment. ... Judge Vidmar found that Plaintiff Bernest Benjamin had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies ... He therefore recommended granting Artiaga and Hohman's MSJ and dismissing Benjamin's claims against them without prejudice. ... Plaintiff Bernest Benjamin's claims against Defendants Lawrence Artiaga and Michael Hohman are dismissed without prejudice”
“In the PFRD, the Honorable Stephan M. Vidmar, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended granting the Defendants' 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss No. V: Dismissal of Count Ten of Plaintiff's Complaint Alleging Violation of Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment Right to Due Process ... Plaintiff Mark G. Bralley did not object to the PFRD. The Court will adopt the PFRD and grant the Defendants' Motion. ... Defendants' 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss No. V ... is granted; and (iii) Count X of the Complaint -- for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment ... right to due process -- is dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Honorable Stephan M. Vidmar, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended granting the requests in the Defendants' Motion and Memorandum of Law to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment Against Plaintiffs' Complaint and for Qualified Immunity ... He recommends that the Court enter summary judgment in the Defendants' favor. ... the requests in the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss ... is granted; and (iii) this action is dismissed with prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 329.5 days (N = 10).
By party consent, Judge Vidmar entered final decisions in a steady stream of Social Security disability appeals under Titles II and XVI. He also wrote recommendations in prisoner civil-rights and other civil cases and, while active, carried substantial criminal and immigration duty in Las Cruces. This describes the composition of his work, not a grant rate.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Vidmar was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2022.
| 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 | 3 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| 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.
A historical record
Judge Vidmar no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.