Paul Jerome Papak
How Judge Papak decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In equal-pay litigation, Papak treated substantial factual disputes over comparable work and pay as matters for trial rather than resolving them on summary judgment.
“deny the University’s motion for summary judgment on Allender’s state law equal pay claim”
In administrative review, he granted relief when the agency's credential-equivalency decision departed from the record and governing standards.
“The court vacates Defendants’ decision and orders Defendants to approve the Church’s 1-140 immigrant visa petition on behalf of Park.”
Procedural preferences
In document-review disputes, Papak required production of reasonably segregable, nonprivileged material rather than allowing a broad privilege assertion to shield whole documents.
“The Corps is required under the Ninth Circuit jurisprudence discussed above to produce segregable non-privileged statements contained within the briefing materials in response to CRK’s FOIA request.”
When permitting a pseudonymous plaintiff to proceed, he kept the issue open for renewed review as trial approached and emphasized active protection of both sides' rights.
“this court shall monitor these proceedings sua sponte as they go forward, to prevent avoidable impairment of defendants’ rights in consequence of John’s anonymity.”
Cautions
A partial-summary-judgment request may be denied without prejudice when the legal issue is better resolved on a fuller record later in the case.
“Morris’ motion (# 102) for partial summary judgment is denied without prejudice to Morris’ entitlement to bring any motion raising the same or related legal issues at a later stage of these proceedings”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Key-Bank’s motion (# 110) is denied”
“TriMet’s motion (# 115) is granted as to CRM’s claim for declaratory judgment”
“CRM’s motion (# 118) is granted as to the narrow question of TriMet’s liability in connection with CRM’s crossclaim for breach of the statutory warranty arising under O.R.S. 75.1100(l)(b) and otherwise denied.”
“Micro-DAQ’s motion (# 17) to dismiss should be granted, and CSI’s claims should be dismissed without prejudice in their entirety.”
“Defendants’ motion to require compliance with Rule 10(a)(# 6) is denied with leave to refile.”
Papak identified the agency action subject to review but deferred the pending merits and record motions: “Resolution of ONDA’s motion for summary judgment (# 52), BLM’s cross-motion for summary judgment (# 67), and BLM’s motion to strike extra-record materials (# 59) will be delayed pending further briefing and oral argument.”
“The court vacates Defendants’ decision and orders Defendants to approve the Church’s 1-140 immigrant visa petition on behalf of Park.”
“ONDA’s motion for leave to supplement its complaint (# 161) is denied”
“ONDA’s motion to modify the court’s earlier temporary injunction (# 162) is denied”
“ONDA’s motion to compel (# 163) is granted.”
“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (# 24) is denied.”
“this court grants plaintiff BMBP’s motion for attorney fees and costs (# 182) in the following amounts: $79,256.00 in attorney fees and $9,671.00 in costs and other expenses for a total award of $88,927.00.”
“the Corps’ motion (# 27) for summary judgment is granted as to the Corps’ decision to withhold from production in response to CRK’s FOIA request the document bearing Vaughn Nos. 102-103 and is otherwise denied”
“CRK’s cross-motion (# 32) for summary judgment is denied as to that same document and is otherwise granted.”
“Reames’ motion (#5) for remand should be granted, and this action should be remanded to the Multnomah County Circuit Court for further proceedings in that forum.”
“I recommend denying Healthport’s motion for summary judgment (# 100)”
“granting Tanita’s motion for summary judgment (# 99).”
“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (# 41) is granted in part.”
“Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment (# 51) is denied.”
“Plaintiffs motion to strike (# 64) is denied as moot.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The randomized 2010 sample includes habeas, statutory, contract, employment, and personal-injury matters. All five sampled cases terminated, with durations ranging from less than one month to about one year. Case duration measures the life of the matter, not decision time on a motion.
Put Judge Papak's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Papak actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Papak's own signed orders and cites them.