Vernon S. Broderick
How Judge Broderick decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In securities-fraud cases he polices the scienter element strictly: a 10b-5 complaint that does not allege facts giving rise to a strong inference of fraudulent intent will be dismissed at the pleading stage even where the alleged misstatements are detailed. A plaintiff pleading securities fraud before him should marshal concrete scienter allegations, not rely on the materiality of the statements alone.
“Because Plaintiffs fail to allege the requisite scienter needed to plead a claim of securities fraud under the Exchange Act, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED.”
Procedural preferences
He enforces arbitration agreements -- including ones accepted electronically as a condition of employment -- and treats them as dispositive: where the claims fall within a binding arbitration clause he compels arbitration and will deny leave to amend as futile if the proposed new claims are likewise arbitrable. A plaintiff in a wage-and-hour or employment matter should expect an electronically-accepted arbitration protocol to be enforced and amendment to be no escape from it.
“because I find that the claims asserted in Plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint are also subject to the parties' binding arbitration agreement, the proposed amendment is futile and thus Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file an amend complaint, (Doc. 87), is DENIED.”
Cautions
He grants summary judgment even on a partial or unopposed record only to the extent the movant's theory is backed by admissible evidence: in an unopposed motion he granted liability but refused damages where the damages theory lacked admissible evidentiary support. A movant -- even an unopposed one -- should support every element, including damages, with admissible proof rather than assume default-like treatment.
“Because I conclude that the City's theory of liability is legally valid and supported by admissible record evidence, the City's Motion is GRANTED in part. However, because the City's theory of damages is lacking in admissible evidentiary support, the City's Motion is DENIED with respect to damages.”
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 = 2 |
Granted: 1Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 2 |
Granted: 1Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
| Motion to compel arbitration N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for leave to amend N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | 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.
“Accordingly, the CFTC has stated a claim against NYMEX upon which relief can be granted, and, for the reasons that follow, I deny NYMEX's Motion to Dismiss.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in its entirety because Plaintiff fails to state a claim of disability discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 791 et seq. ... For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendant's Motion in its entirety, and all of Plaintiffs claims are dismissed.”
“Before me is the City's unopposed summary judgment motion against RIL (the "Motion"). Because I conclude that the City's theory of liability is legally valid and supported by admissible record evidence, the City's Motion is GRANTED in part. However, because the City's theory of damages is lacking in admissible evidentiary support, the City's Motion is DENIED with respect to damages.”
“Before me is Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint for failure to state a claim. Because Plaintiffs fail to allege the requisite scienter needed to plead a claim of securities fraud under the Exchange Act, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED.”
“For the reasons set forth herein, I find that Plaintiffs' claims fall within the scope of the parties' binding arbitration agreement, and thus Defendants' motion to compel arbitration, (Doc. 52), is GRANTED.”
“In addition, because I find that the claims asserted in Plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint are also subject to the parties' binding arbitration agreement, the proposed amendment is futile and thus Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file an amend complaint, (Doc. 87), is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Sample from search_dockets(assigned_judge='Vernon S. Broderick'). IMPORTANT CAVEAT: the terminated dockets on the visible page were all FILED BEFORE his 2013-09-10 commission (one terminated in 2005, before he was a judge at all), so they were reassigned to him as the current seat-holder and their filed-to-terminated durations reflect prior judges' handling plus his, NOT his end-to-end case management. They are recorded as raw computed durations with this caveat, not as a measure of his pace. Nature-of-suit mix spans prisoner petitions, prisoner civil rights, employment/civil-rights (jobs), FLSA labor, and other statutory actions.