Terence C. Kern
How Judge Kern rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Kern
Terence C. Kern joined the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma after receiving a commission on June 9, 1994. Appointed by President Bill Clinton, he served as chief judge before assuming senior status on January 4, 2010. In 2023 he announced that he would leave active senior service by the end of that year.
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 Kern decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the marriage-equality ruling, the judge treated the fact that a law's own legislative history and public advocacy centered on moral disapproval of a group, rather than any independent, non-moral state interest, as itself close to dispositive under rational-basis review, rather than accepting after-the-fact secular justifications offered in litigation.
“The Court holds that Oklahoma's constitutional amendment limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
In an insurance-coverage action, Kern deferred deciding whether the underlying state-court pleadings alleged sexual misconduct until the patients could prosecute those actions as they proposed.
“Patients, and not FAIRCO, should dictate how they will prosecute their State Court Actions ... The Court simply finds that the question of whether Patients actually 'allege' sexual misconduct by Stewart in the State Court Actions is best decided after Patients attempt to prosecute such actions in the limited manner they propose.”
In a class-certification dispute, Kern found Stephenson lacked standing on a contract claim after the record established that no favored distributor paid the alleged lower formula price at the terminals where Stephenson bought gasoline.
“It is undisputed, at this point in the proceedings, that no Favored Distributor was charged or ultimately paid the formula price at either terminal from which Stephenson lifted gasoline during the class period... Stephenson lacks standing to assert this... breach of contract claim.”
Procedural preferences
In a removal dispute, Kern found the defendant had supplied no economic analysis to help estimate the value of the punitive-damages claim.
“Defendant has failed to provide any economic analysis that would assist the Court in estimating the potential value of the punitive damages claim.”
In Walker v. Spirit Aerosystems, Kern read the employee’s EEOC charge to encompass a failure-to-accommodate claim because its narrative about prior accommodation and rotated assignments could prompt a reasonable investigation.
“Construed liberally, the Court finds the 2016 Charge to be sufficient to reasonably prompt an investigation into whether Defendant failed to accommodate a request for an accommodation.”
Cautions
In Wilson v. Leitch, Kern dismissed the plaintiff's Section 1983 claim against the opposing lawyer in a state eviction action. The complaint alleged no facts showing that the lawyer acted in any capacity other than representing the landlord or engaged in joint action with the state.
“[I]t is well established that mere recourse to state or local court procedures does not by itself constitute 'joint activity' with the state sufficient to subject a private party to liability under section 1983.”
In Wilkins v. City of Tulsa, the Tenth Circuit reversed and remanded Kern's summary judgment ruling for the city and its officers in an excessive-force case.
“DECISION from Circuit Court reversing and remanding the Decision of the District Court”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 197) is GRANTED as to Part A of the Oklahoma Constitutional Amendment and otherwise DENIED.”
“Defendant Sally Howe Smith's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 216) is DENIED as to Part A of the Oklahoma Constitutional Amendment, and GRANTED as to Part B based on the Barton couple's lack of standing.”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 37) is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. It is denied as to Parents’ negligence claim, which was asserted only against School District. It is granted as to Parents’ constitutional claim, which was asserted against School District and Alexander in his individual capacity.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 12) is DENIED.”
“Patients' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 13) is DENIED.”
“FAIRCO's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 58) is GRANTED as to the four declaratory judgments set forth above; DENIED as to the excess coverage issue; and STAYED as to application of Exclusion K and/or the SMS to Patients' medical negligence claims.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Doc. 11) is GRANTED. The Court Clerk is directed to REMAND the case to the District Court for Tulsa County.”
“The petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Dkt.# 1), as amended and supplemented (Dkt.# 8), is denied.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (‘Motion for Certification’) (Doc. 152) is DENIED based on Stephenson's lack of standing.”
“Defendant's Motion to Strike Testimony of Plaintiff's Proposed Expert Regarding Injury (Doc. 215) is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Strike Declaration of Alvin Smith (Doc. 199) is DENIED as premature.”
“The United States' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 7) is GRANTED... This matter is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. 8) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff ConocoPhillips Company's Motion and Brief in Support of Request for Permanent Injunctive and Declaratory Relief (Doc. 93) and Intervenors ... Motion and Brief in Support of Request for Permanent Injunctive and Declaratory Relief (Doc. 94) are hereby GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“Defendants' Objections to Jurisdiction and Motion to Dismiss Temporary Restraining Order (Docs. 91 and 92) are hereby DENIED.”
“Before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on all remaining claims (Doc. 95). For reasons explained below, the motion is granted.”
“TU's Motion for Contempt (Doc. 311) is GRANTED. TU shall file a motion for attorneys' fees and costs with supporting time records no later than two weeks from the date of this Order.”
“Before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 22) of Defendants ... For reasons set forth below, the Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“Defendants' Motion in Limine (Doc. 31) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- His sampled docket spans general civil litigation (insurance coverage, consumer and employment disputes, personal injury and products liability), Section 1983 civil-rights suits, Social Security appeals, and Section 2254/2241 state-prisoner habeas petitions, drawn primarily from the Tulsa division.
- He was assigned an unusually broad range of case types over his three decades on the bench, including a multidistrict-style state-court removal in the national opioid litigation (City of Broken Arrow v. Purdue Pharma) and a long-running excessive-force suit against the City of Tulsa that went up to the Tenth Circuit and back.
- He announced his retirement to inactive senior status in mid-2023, effective by the end of that year, and received no new case assignments in this dataset after January 2024.
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 | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 12 | 8 |
| Mar 2023 | 5 | 8 |
| Sep 2022 | 13 | 7 |
| Mar 2022 | 8 | 5 |
| Sep 2021 | 17 | 11 |
| Mar 2021 | 3 | 7 |
| Sep 2020 | 21 | 7 |
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 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, not for Judge Kern: 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 | 525 | 7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 112 | 5.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 401 | 7.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 9 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 3 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 525 | 7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 491 | 7.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 487 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 526 | 13.4 months |
| Sep 2021 | 481 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 563 | 10.8 months |
| Sep 2019 | 544 | 9.8 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 Kern with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Kern, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Kern's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace