Mark A. Kearney
How Judge Kearney decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On a motion to dismiss he parses the complaint claim by claim, dismissing legally foreclosed claims with prejudice while allowing curable claims to be repleaded.
“Defendant's Motion (ECF Doc. No. 8) is GRANTED: 1. Plaintiffs § 1981, § 1983 retaliation and state law claims are dismissed with prejudice; and, 2. Plaintiffs § 1983 race discrimination Monell claim is dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend”
Cautions
He denies summary judgment where genuine issues of material fact remain that require a jury to weigh witness credibility.
“it is ORDERED Defendant's Motion (ECF Doc. No. 31) is DENIED as there are genuine issues of material fact requiring our jury's evaluating witness credibility.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“It is ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF Doc. No. 21) is GRANTED. There is no genuine issue of material fact concerning the interpretation of the exclusions in the insurance policy purchased by Defendants.”
“The City of Philadelphia's Motion to Dismiss the § 1983 claims against it is GRANTED and Count II against the City of Philadelphia is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Defendant's Motion (ECF Doc. No. 8) is GRANTED: 1. Plaintiffs § 1981, § 1983 retaliation and state law claims are dismissed with prejudice; and, 2. Plaintiffs § 1983 race discrimination Monell claim is dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend”
“it is ORDERED Defendant's Motion (ECF Doc. No. 31) is DENIED as there are genuine issues of material fact requiring our jury's evaluating witness credibility.”
“it is ORDERED Defendants' Motion for summary judgment (ECF Doc. No. 23) is GRANTED as there are no genuine issues of material fact and Defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
“it is ORDERED the Commonwealth Defendants’ Motion to dismiss (ECF 15) is GRANTED in part requiring: 1. We dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff’s claims against [the Commonwealth, the Pennsylvania State Police, official capacity, and 1983 false arrest/false imprisonment, Fourteenth Amendment malicious prosecution and state law claims]; 2. Plaintiff may proceed on his Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution civil rights claim”
“it is ORDERED Defendants’ Motion to dismiss (ECF 18) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part requiring we: 1. DISMISS with prejudice claims for deliberate indifference under Title III (Count XIII); 2. DISMISS claims with leave to amend as warranted under Rule 11 ... [Counts VIII-XII, V-VII, IV]”
“We deny the United States' motion to dismiss because Delgado has sufficiently stated a plausible claim to relief.”
“We deny the United States' motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, motion for summary judgment, because Delgado's claim is not barred by the two-year statute of limitations under the Act. The discovery rule is a question of fact.”
“The national firm and a few of its almost 350 lawyers sued here now move to dismiss the Philadelphia firm's claims before discovery. We grant their motion in part and deny in part.”
“We deny the Officer Defendants' and the City's motion to dismiss. We will now learn, among other things, why an officer would take and then post this tragedy on social media and if the Law allows Ms. Brookins a damages recovery.”
“We decline to certify a proposed class of ranking officers who self-report overtime”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Judge Kearney's civil docket in the Philadelphia and Allentown divisions includes a substantial number of cases resolved through administrative termination. The reviewed records also show frequent scheduling and status orders, use of special masters, and early summary-judgment and trial deadlines.
Put Judge Kearney's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Kearney actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Kearney's own signed orders and cites them.