Mary Gordon Baker
How Judge Baker rules, drawn from 3 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Baker
Mary Gordon Baker has served as a United States magistrate judge for the District of South Carolina since January 2015. Based in Charleston, she previously worked as an assistant United States attorney, a federal public defender, and a private practice lawyer.
Judge Baker's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Baker, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Contacting chambers
Notify chambers by email when the parties agree to extend the time to respond to a pleading.
“The parties are to notify the Court when they have agreed to extend the time to respond to a pleading pursuant to Local Civil Rule 12.01.”
Discovery
In represented cases, hold a telephone conference with Judge Baker before filing a discovery motion.
“Prior to filing motions relating to discovery, the attorneys are required to have a telephone conference with Judge Baker.”
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 Baker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In ContraVest, Baker recommended compelling an insurer’s claims-file discovery in a bad-faith coverage suit after finding evidence that the insurer changed its coverage position. The district judge adopted her recommendation.
“plaintiffs presented evidence that once defendant realized that the underlying policies were nearing exhaustion, it essentially changed its coverage position in an effort to avoid coverage.”
In a 2026 consent Social Security appeal, Baker remanded after finding that the administrative law judge discounted four providers' shared opinion about work absences without explaining how the record supported that rejection.
“the ALJ erred in discounting the opinions of four separate providers”
Procedural preferences
In Greenspan v. Brothers Property Corp., Baker recommended allowing joinder of the local manager after removal and remanding because his addition defeated diversity jurisdiction. The district judge adopted that recommendation.
“It is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiffs Motion For Remand (Dkt. No. 21) be GRANTED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“it is RECOMMENDED that Brothers’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 24) be DENIED.”
“It is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiffs Motion For Remand (Dkt. No. 21) be GRANTED.”
“the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker ... recommending the court grant plaintiffs ... motions to compel. ... the court adopts the R & R and grants plaintiffs’ motions to compel.”
“the Magistrate Judge filed her Report recommending that the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits be affirmed.”
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 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, not for Judge Baker: 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 | 2,805 | 7.8 months |
| Closed with no court action | 724 | 5.1 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,005 | 8.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 64 | 17.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 12 | 36 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,805 | 7.8 months |
| Sep 2024 | 5,800 | 12.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,296 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,364 | 9.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,599 | 10 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,190 | 10.1 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,402 | 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 Baker with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Baker, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Baker's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace