Anthony J. Brindisi
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 64) is GRANTED; and ... Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice”
“Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 13) is GRANTED; and ... Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice”
Pro se civil-rights suit against a county sheriff. After Magistrate Judge Lovric denied an incomplete in-forma-pauperis application and repeated show-cause orders and mailings were returned undeliverable (plaintiff did not keep a current address or pay the fee), Lovric recommended sua sponte dismissal under Rule 41(b) (or alternatively as frivolous). No objections were filed; Judge Brindisi adopted the recommendation for clear error and dismissed the complaint under Rule 41(b), agreeing that a lesser sanction would be futile. The order resolved no pending party motion and is recorded as a procedural disposition. It is one of Brindisi's earliest signed orders, issued one month after his December 2024 commission.
“The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 87) is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 68) is GRANTED; and 3. Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“IT IS ORDERED that 1. Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 58) is GRANTED. ... 3. Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Defendant's request for attorney's fees (Dkt. No. 69) is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that 1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 31) is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“IT IS ORDERED that 1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 53) is GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff's federal claims are DISMISSED with prejudice; and 3. Plaintiff's state law claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Amended Petition, Dkt. No. 9, be DENIED and DISMISSED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that no Certificate of Appealability (‘COA’) shall issue because Petitioner has failed to make a ‘substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right’”
“It is ORDERED that the Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 12) is ACCEPTED. Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. The Commissioner's motion is DENIED. The Commissioner's final decision is VACATED. This matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)”
“IT IS ORDERED that 1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 63) is GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff's letter motion for assignment of counsel (Dkt. No. 67) is DENIED; and 3. Plaintiff's amended complaint (Dkt. No. 41) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff's letter motion for assignment of counsel (Dkt. No. 67) is DENIED”
“IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that 1. Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 15) is GRANTED in part; and 2. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“It is ORDERED that the Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 31) is ACCEPTED; Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 24) is GRANTED; and plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Brindisi inherited a docket heavily weighted toward self-represented prisoner civil-rights cases, along with habeas, employment, federal medical-malpractice, and diversity personal-injury matters. Several inherited cases ended quickly through initial screening. Cases filed during his own tenure include municipal civil-rights and land-use disputes, trademark and consumer-communications claims, and employment litigation, indicating a broader mix as his docket develops.
Put Judge Brindisi's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Brindisi actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Brindisi's own signed orders and cites them.