Bridget Meehan Brennan

United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio district Appointed by Joe Biden (Democratic) 27 signed orders read

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Northwestern Ohio Administrators, Inc. v. Simplified Living LLC
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons stated herein, Defendant Simplified Living LLC's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is DENIED.”

Fambrough v. City of East Cleveland
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the City Defendants' motion for summary judgment on all counts is GRANTED (Doc. 103), Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is DENIED (Doc. 104), and Gardner's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED (Doc. 108).”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Johnstone v. CrossCountry Mortgage, LLC
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 58) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification (Doc. 57) and Defendant's Motion to Strike or Exclude Plaintiffs' Supplemental Expert Declaration (Doc. 63) are DENIED as moot.”

Nations Lending Corp. v. Schultz
1:23-cv-00876 · 2023-06-09
Motion for reconsideration (defendant) Denied

“Given that Defendant's reconsideration motion cites absolutely no Ohio caselaw standing for the proposition that the Ohio state court misapplied its own law in determining that the forum selection clause provided a valid basis for personal jurisdiction, Defendant has not met its burden of demonstrating why, as he contends, there is a ‘need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice.’ Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.”

Bushner v. McConahay
1:22-cv-00484 · 2024-03-21
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. (Doc. No. 24.)”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The moving Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. (Doc. No. 26.) The Court DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims against Officer Pajot. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

Valois-Perez v. Warden Kenneth Black
3:21-cv-01149 · 2024-03-15
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“For the reasons stated in the Court's accompanying Memorandum Opinion and Order (Doc. No. 18), the Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. The case is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

Bowman v. MetroHealth System
1:25-cv-00256 · 2025-11-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“For the reasons stated herein, Defendant MetroHealth System's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 16) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Count Three of Plaintiff Jennifer Bowman's Complaint is DISMISSED. The Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to all other claims presented in the Complaint.”

Harding v. Steak N Shake, Inc.
1:21-cv-01212 · 2024-08-15
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“There is no genuine dispute of material fact that Steak N Shake claimed a tip credit for time its servers spent performing unrelated work in violation of the FLSA, the 1967 dual jobs regulation, and the 80/20 rule. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is granted with respect to their dual jobs claim.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Therefore, there is an outstanding dispute of material fact whether Steak N Shake improperly claimed a tip credit for time its servers performed tip-supporting work. Accordingly, summary judgment is not appropriate on this claim.”

United States v. Arrendondo
1:22-cr-00599 · 2024-09-25
Motion for sentence reduction (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, the motion for sentence reduction (Doc. 55) is DENIED.”

United States v. Carroll
1:22-cr-00340 · 2024-05-08
Motion for sentence reduction (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons stated herein, Defendant David Carroll's motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a reduced sentence pursuant to Parts A and B of Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines is DENIED.”

Zeal v. Spirit Airlines, Inc.
1:23-cv-01784 · 2024-04-19
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“Accordingly, the CLE Defendants are DISMISSED and the Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. No. 10).”

Adler v. American Express Company
1:24-cv-00311 · 2025-03-25
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons stated herein, American Express's motion to compel arbitration (Doc. 19) is GRANTED, and the matter is STAYED pending arbitration.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 291 days (N = 6).

Enumerated from the docket records (filed 2022-2023 windows). Active general civil + criminal docket: section 1983 civil rights / police (Fambrough), ERISA/LMRA fringe-benefit collections (Northwestern Ohio Administrators), TCPA consumer class (Johnstone v. CrossCountry), qui tam / False Claims Act (Novik v. Cosmax), ADA / voting-rights (League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose), diversity contract (VGW Holdings, ACO v. Wavin), FLSA (Loweth), Social Security appeals (Heatherly, referred to MJ Darrell A. Clay), 2254 habeas (Alexander v. Wallace), prisoner civil rights (Aluizio), plus federal criminal and DMCA-subpoena miscellaneous matters. Referred magistrate observed: Darrell A. Clay (SS).

Put Judge Brennan's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Brennan actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Brennan's own signed orders and cites them.