Colleen D. Holland
How Judge Holland rules, drawn from 33 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Holland
Colleen D. Holland has served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of New York since January 2025. She earned degrees from the University of Rochester and Cornell Law School and previously served as special counsel to Chief Judge Elizabeth A. Wolford.
Judge Holland's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Holland, 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
Contacting chambers
A civil conference telephone request must be sent to chambers at least two business days in advance.
“For conferences in civil matters, parties may request to participate via telephone by submitting a letter request to Chambers, with copies to all counsel and self-represented parties, at least two business days in advance of the conference.”
Motions
Unless the court has provided a date, motions should omit return dates; the court generally issues a motion scheduling order.
“Unless previously provided with a date by the Court, motions shall not contain return dates.”
Discovery
Discovery disputes begin with a letter no longer than four single-spaced pages, after which the judge generally schedules an informal conference.
“If a discovery dispute arises, the parties shall initially advise the Court of the dispute via letter (not to exceed four single-spaced pages), with copies to all counsel and self-represented parties.”
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).
- Procedures for the Filing, Service, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents (Amended General Order 167) ↗
- General Order 157: Disclosure of Members, Shareholders, Partners, and Leaders of Business Organization Parties ↗
- General Order 166: Identification Procedures in Courthouses ↗
- General Order 168: Dispositive Referrals of Social Security Appeals to United States Magistrate Judge ↗
How Judge Holland decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In assessing offensive collateral estoppel, she reads a general municipal-liability jury verdict as resolving the specific, narrower issue actually contested, and looks past a party's attempt to characterize a mixed jury instruction as leaving the issue undecided.
“Contrary to Defendants' arguments, these were not three distinct theories of liability—the operative question was always whether the City had 'a policy, custom, or practice for purposes of Section 1983,' and that is the question the Dempsey jury actually and necessarily decided.”
In Preston v. City of Rochester, she treated the plaintiff’s proposed jury statement of facts as a judicial admission because it was offered for reading before trial evidence.
“By proposing that these facts be read to the jury before any proof had been admitted, Preston was necessarily taking the position that they were accurate.”
In Preston v. City of Rochester, she permitted limited cross-examination about an earlier adverse credibility finding under Rule 608(b), after weighing its age against its relevance and probative value.
“Certainly, there are also factors that weigh against admissibility. The prior lie occurred in 2011, approximately 15 years ago... But on the whole, the Court concludes that the adverse credibility determination in People v. Barbosa is relevant and probative, and that limited cross-examination thereon should be permitted.”
Procedural preferences
In Gursslin v. City of Rochester and related civil-rights cases, Judge Holland denied bifurcation because the movants had not shown that doubling the number of trials would make better use of court and party resources.
“Bifurcation is the exception, not the rule, and the movant must justify bifurcation on the basis of the substantial benefits that it can be expected to produce... the Court is not persuaded that holding eight trials, rather than four, will promote efficient use of the Court's, parties' and jur[y's] time and resources.”
In Gursslin v. City of Rochester, she granted an unopposed request to exchange trial dates with the related Preston case to accommodate the anticipated length of the Gursslin trial.
“The Court accordingly grants Plaintiff's request. To accommodate the anticipated length of the trial in Gursslin, the scheduled trial date shall be moved forward by three days, to June 17, 2026.”
Cautions
In Gursslin v. City of Rochester, she reminded counsel to read cited cases in full and quote them accurately after the lawyers resolved a citation issue without court intervention.
“The Court appreciates counsel's ability to address this matter without Court intervention. Of course, the Court expects all attorneys who, by signing pleadings, assert their accuracy, to read every case in full and to quote from them accurately before submitting papers to the Court.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“At the trial in this matter, the City will be collaterally estopped from arguing that it did not have a custom, policy, or practice of authorizing its officers to use lethal force against dogs encountered during police operations without first assessing the actual threat posed by the dog.”
“Defendants' motion for reconsideration of Judge Wolford's denial of summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity (Dkt. 99) is denied.”
“Preston's motion for leave to file a sur-reply (Dkt. 106) is also denied.”
“Preston's motion for permission to cross-examine Osipovitch on the adverse credibility determinations in People v. Barbosa and People v. Lofton (Dkt. 76) is granted to the extent set forth above.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motions to bifurcate (Dempsey, Dkt. 119; Gursslin, Dkt. 140; McGill, Dkt. 68; Preston, Dkt. 53) are denied.”
“The Court grants Plaintiff's counsel's request to appear for oral argument on October 27, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. via remote means.”
“Plaintiff's counsel's request to appear virtually at the pretrial conference scheduled for March 26, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. is granted.”
“The Court accordingly grants Plaintiff's request. To accommodate the anticipated length of the trial in Gursslin, the scheduled trial date shall be moved forward by three days, to June 17, 2026.”
“For the reasons stated on the record, 115 MOTION to Amend/Correct is granted.”
“ORDER granting 2 Motion to Seal as to Jeramy Rivera (1). Signed by Hon. Colleen D. Holland on 6/26/2025.”
“ORDER granting 2 Motion to Seal Case as to Sealed Matter (1). Signed by Hon. Colleen D. Holland on 10/3/2025.”
“For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Plaintiff's motion to the extent that the matter is remanded for further administrative proceedings and denies the Commissioner's motion.”
“For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Plaintiff's motion (Dkt. 8) to the extent the matter is remanded for further administrative proceedings and denies the Commissioner's motion (Dkt. 11).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Judge Holland's docket to date consists of civil matters referred to her by the district's Article III judges or accepted by party consent for final disposition, and a criminal 'mj' docket of initial appearances, detention proceedings, and search-warrant matters.
- Her most developed body of independent work is a set of four related consent-jurisdiction Fourth Amendment cases against the City of Rochester and individual police officers arising from the shooting deaths of plaintiffs' pet dogs, one of which she tried to a jury verdict, and a recurring docket of consent-jurisdiction Social Security disability-appeal cases inherited from her predecessor, in which she has now issued ten of her own terminal rulings.
- She has also issued a substantive multi-motion order and a discovery ruling in two other inherited pro se and county-defendant civil-rights cases, and has ruled on contested pretrial-detention motions in her criminal docket.
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 | 3 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
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 United States District Court for the Western District of New York, not for Judge Holland: 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 | 1,499 | 9.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 91 | 8.7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,344 | 8.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 56 | 28.5 months |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,499 | 9.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,783 | 7.9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 1,768 | 15.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,892 | 15.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,130 | 14.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,177 | 14.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,971 | 14.8 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 Holland with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Holland, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Holland's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace