Cynthia Reed Eddy
Judge Eddy no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Eddy decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In prisoner cases she enforces the Prison Litigation Reform Act's exhaustion requirement strictly and as a bright-line rule: a prisoner who appeals some grievances to final review but does not complete the applicable multi-tier appeal for the claim at issue has not exhausted, and the court has no discretion to excuse it.
“The exhaustion requirement is a 'bright-line rule' and 'it is beyond the power of this court - or any other - to excuse compliance with the exhaustion requirement, whether on the ground of futility, inadequacy, or any other basis.'”
On removal she construes the statute strictly against removal: a writ of summons alone is not the 'initial pleading' that starts the removal clock, and a pre-complaint demand letter is not an 'other paper,' so removing before a complaint is filed is premature regardless of the amount in controversy.
“removal is not proper until a complaint has been filed in state court.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“It is respectfully recommended that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 3) filed by Petitioner, Derrick Gibson, be denied and that a certificate of appealability be denied.”
“it is recommended that the Motions to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint filed by the DOC Defendants (ECF No. 53) and Defendant Elon Mwaura, PA-C (ECF No. 65) be granted as Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act.”
“it is respectfully recommended that Plaintiffs' motion to remand be granted and this case be remanded to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.”
“The Corrections Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. All official capacity claims against Corrections Defendants ... are dismissed with prejudice. All claims against Corrections Defendants R. Hawkinberry, Eric Armel, Mark Capozza, Keri Moore, and Doris Varner are dismissed with prejudice due to Plaintiff's failure to plead facts respecting personal involvement. The Motion to Dismiss is denied in all other respects.”
“it is respectfully recommended that Superintendent Gilmore and Administrator Vihlidal's motion for summary judgment be granted because Moser failed to exhaust his Fourteenth and Eighth Amendment claims against these Defendants.”
“it is respectfully recommended that summary judgment be granted in Dr. Jin's favor for Moser's deliberate indifference claim, as this claim is barred by the statute of limitations.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 56] is granted. Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient evidence adducing a First Amendment retaliation claim. Further, Plaintiff has failed to show that she is entitled to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection clause, or that Defendants had no rational basis for treating her differently. As a consequence, the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against Defendant Fayette County are also entitled to summary judgment.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court will, by separate Order of Court, GRANT Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment in part, and DENY it in part, consistent with this Memorandum Opinion.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice against the remaining Defendants under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and it would be futile to allow Plaintiff the opportunity to file another amended complaint in this matter.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Her work is dominated by the district's large prisoner civil-rights and state/federal habeas caseload handled on referral, plus civil cases she presided over by consent of the parties and duty matters. In the final months before her 2024 retirement her assigned-judge docket shows duty-rotation work: search-warrant applications, fast screening dismissals of pro se in forma pauperis complaints (filed and closed within days), and an alien-detainee habeas petition. Examples of the nature-of-suit mix appear below.
A historical record
Judge Eddy no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.