Christy Criswell Wiegand
How Judge Wiegand decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In FLSA/wage-and-hour cases she is rigorous on the statutory/regulatory framework: a tip-credit employer that omits any of the five 29 C.F.R. 531.59(b) notice items forfeits the credit entirely, and worker-classification and Dual Jobs '80/20' questions are treated as fact-bound and generally survive to a jury.
“her claim that Defendant's tip credit notice was deficient under the FLSA”
On a defense summary-judgment motion in a tort case she requires affirmative record evidence of the element at issue: a plaintiff who cannot recall the facts of the incident cannot create a triable issue on negligence, and derivative claims fall with the primary one.
“cannot recall any details about the accident that would establish which driver, if any, was negligent”
Procedural preferences
She polices Article III standing carefully in consumer-statute (FDCPA) cases post-TransUnion: a bare informational/procedural injury is insufficient, and she will dismiss for lack of standing -- but without prejudice and with a dated leave to replead -- rather than reaching the merits, and she declines to consider harm theories not pleaded.
“the Amended Complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing”
On class-wide partial summary judgment she applies the one-way-intervention rule: she will defer a plaintiff's class-claim SJ until after Rule 23 certification rather than let a class obtain a merits ruling before the class is bound.
“is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, pending certification of a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23”
Cautions
Reconsideration is a heavy lift before her, including for the government: a DOL motion to reconsider a disclosure order was denied for lack of clear error, with the manifest-injustice bar emphasized.
“this limited disclosure close to trial will not be unjust, let alone manifestly so”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. With respect to Count I of the Complaint, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted with respect to (1) her claim that Defendant's tip credit notice was deficient under the FLSA and (2) her claim that Defendant failed to keep proper records of the time worked by its servers under the FLSA. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment on the PMWA claims contained in Count II of the Complaint, however, is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, pending certification of a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.”
“Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss are DENIED in full.”
“Ms. Waller's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby DENIED and Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as set forth in the accompanying ORDER.”
“Leopold's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 108, and Trinity's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 106, are hereby GRANTED IN PART, such that the Amended Complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing, and the remainder of the parties' Motions, ECF Nos. 106, 108, 122, are hereby DENIED AS MOOT.”
“the remainder of the parties' Motions, ECF Nos. 106, 108, 122, are hereby DENIED AS MOOT. Mr. McDonough is granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint by June 23, 2023.”
“it is hereby ORDERED that the DOL's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment will be DENIED and Defendant's Motion will be GRANTED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' Motion will be GRANTED. Accordingly, Mr. Christopherson's claims against both Defendants will be DISMISSED and final judgment will be entered in Defendants' favor.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Lawrence County Domestic Relation Section’s Motion to Dismiss will be GRANTED, and Plaintiff Ashleigh M. Taylor’s Complaint will be DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 23, is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 10, is hereby DISMISSED. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an Amended Complaint”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be GRANTED IN PART such that Counts II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, X, and XI will be dismissed.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 26, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
“Motion for Default Judgment, ECF No. 47, is DENIED without prejudice to SHNMIN re-filing such motion”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled caseload is weighted toward wage-and-hour collective and class actions, with additional consumer-credit and False Claims Act matters. Several cases were reassigned to Wiegand after filing, and the wage cases often lasted several years while proceeding through certification, decertification, and alternative dispute resolution.
Put Judge Wiegand's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Wiegand actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Wiegand's own signed orders and cites them.