Jack Zouhary
How Judge Zouhary rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Zouhary
Jack Zouhary is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Zouhary received a commission on March 28, 2006. Judge Zouhary assumed senior status on July 1, 2019.
Judge Zouhary's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Zouhary, 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.
- Case Management Conference Notice/Report of Parties ↗
- Case Management Conference Order ↗
- Civil Case Management Procedures ↗
- Plaintiff Statement of Disputed Facts ↗
- Trial Order - Civil ↗
- Trial Order - Criminal ↗
- JERS Order ↗
- Scheduling ↗
- Disputes and Settlements ↗
Key rules
Filing
Counsel must send chambers a bound, tabbed courtesy copy of briefs and supporting materials.
“Counsel shall promptly submit to Chambers a bound and tabbed courtesy copy of all briefing with supporting materials.”
Motions
Counsel must discuss the basis for a proposed motion to dismiss before filing it.
“Judge Z requires counsel to discuss the basis for any Motion to Dismiss”
Discovery
If counsel cannot resolve a discovery dispute, they should call chambers to arrange a telephone conference.
“If counsel cannot resolve a discovery dispute, they should call chambers (419) 213-5675 to schedule a telephone conference.”
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).
How Judge Zouhary decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a takings case, the court required affirmative admissible valuation evidence. Criticism of the opposing appraiser and anticipated cross-examination did not satisfy the claimant’s burden to establish additional compensation.
“Cross-examination is not a substitute for evidence on an essential element of TMP’s own claim. TMP ‘must present affirmative evidence to support its position.’ Jones, 677 F. App’x at 282. It failed to do so.”
Procedural preferences
In a Medicare appeal, the court remanded after sworn evidence rebutted presumed receipt of the agency decisions. Constructive awareness of recoupment did not establish receipt for the hearing-request deadline.
“the regulation starts the 60-day period from receipt, not from constructive awareness, or the date on which a sophisticated provider could have investigated further.”
Cautions
In one marine-insurance dispute, the court enforced a captain warranty according to the policy text: a mechanical failure did not end navigation, and the named captain’s absence from the helm voided coverage.
“Sebring’s failure to comply with the Captain’s Warranty voids coverage.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For all of the above reasons, Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 9-11) are granted; Pitts' Motions for Default Judgment (Doc. 13) and Summary Judgment (Doc. 14) are denied.”
“Pitts' Motions for Default Judgment (Doc. 13) and Summary Judgment (Doc. 14) are denied.”
“Based upon the foregoing, this Court finds that injunctive relief is not warranted and denies Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Administrative Action (Doc. 3).”
“This Court adopts the R&R (Doc. 7) and affirms the dismissal of the Petition.”
“Tenneco's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 42) is granted in part and denied in part. The fraudulent-inducement claim is dismissed with prejudice. However, because issues of material fact remain, the breach-of-contract and promissory estoppel claims shall proceed.”
“For the above reasons, Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 16) is granted.”
“This Court denies Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on all grounds.”
“Defendant's Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony (Doc. 67) is granted as to Dr. Jonathan Rutchik and Craig Cantrall, and granted in part and denied in part as to Lance Traves.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Judicial Notice (Doc. 72) is denied without prejudice.”
“For the many reasons outlined above, Defendants' Motion is granted, and the case is dismissed.”
“For the reasons stated above, summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants City of Kenton, Chief Vermillion, and Coffman; and also in favor of Defendants Hardin County and Sheriff Everhart pursuant to Monell.”
“Because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the leg sweep was reasonable, this case shall proceed to trial against Defendant Holbrook on the claims under Section 1983 (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count III) and assault and battery (Count IV).”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 2) is granted. This case is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.”
“the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 40) is granted.”
“The Motion for Additional Discovery (Doc. 41 at 19) is denied; and the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 40) is granted.”
“Therefore, Plaintiff's Motion for Remand is held in abeyance, allowing parties leave until on or before January 19, 2007 to file simultaneous briefs (following the exchange of Rule 26(a) disclosures and limited discovery regarding potential liability of the individual Defendants) for the Court's further consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Remand.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 285 days (N = 6).
The reviewed dockets span 2021, 2022, and 2025 filings and include civil and criminal matters. Fourteen entry streams supplied five express motion grants, mostly involving procedure or preliminary relief. The sample is narrow and is not a complete caseload census.
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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 3 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 Northern District of Ohio, not for Judge Zouhary: 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 | 2,048 | 7.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 394 | 3.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,035 | 5.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 607 | 11.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 12 | 18 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,048 | 7.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,008 | 7.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,137 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,330 | 9.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,432 | 9.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,788 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 3,158 | 9.9 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 Zouhary with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Zouhary, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Zouhary's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace