David N. Hurd
How Judge Hurd decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Denies a plaintiff's premature, pre-discovery summary-judgment motion without prejudice and with leave to renew after discovery, rather than resolving it on an incomplete record.
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 37) is DENIED without prejudice, and with opportunity to renew upon completion of discovery”
Procedural preferences
Conducts genuine de novo review of magistrate Reports and Recommendations when a party objects; grants defense summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, including as to non-moving defendants.
“Defendant's motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 127) is GRANTED; and 3. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED.”
Cautions
Denies eve-of-trial Rule 42(b) motions to bifurcate excessive-force claims, since damages evidence is intertwined with and relevant to the liability question.
“Defendants' motion to bifurcate is DENIED”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED”
“Defendants' motion to dismiss is DENIED”
“Respondent's motion to dismiss petitioner's verified petition is GRANTED; 2. Petitioner's verified petition is DISMISSED”
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and 3. Plaintiff's operative complaint is DISMISSED.”
“Defendant's motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 127) is GRANTED; and 3. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED.”
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 37) is DENIED without prejudice, and with opportunity to renew upon completion of discovery”
“Plaintiff's second motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 51) is DENIED”
“motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 64) is DENIED”
“The Petition, Dkt. No. 1, is DENIED AND DISMISSED in its entirety”
Initial statutory screening order in a pro se Section 1983 excessive-force action arising from an arrest. Adopting a magistrate judge's report and recommendation without objection, the court permitted the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment individual-capacity excessive-force claims to proceed against three named officers, dismissed a Fourteenth Amendment due-process claim and duplicative official-capacity claims with prejudice, dismissed the remaining claims without prejudice, and gave the plaintiff thirty days to file a second amended complaint. This is a section 1915 initial-review screening order rather than a ruling on an adversarial motion; motions array left empty as zero decision-value for motion statistics.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 365 days (N = 13).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 139.5 days (N = 4).
The reviewed civil docket is weighted toward Federal Tort Claims Act suits, False Claims Act matters that often ended by settlement or stipulated dismissal, prisoner civil-rights cases, diversity contract disputes, and employment or education-related civil-rights claims. Many matters proceeded through magistrate-judge referrals.
Put Judge Hurd's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Hurd actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Hurd's own signed orders and cites them.