Jeffrey Lynn Viken

United States District Court for the District of South Dakota district Retired 2023 · served 2009–2023 Appointed by Barack Obama (Democratic) 27 signed orders read

Judge Viken no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Viken decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On a compassionate-release motion he will grant relief where the defendant documents chronic health conditions that materially elevate risk, treating a concrete, individualized medical showing as the extraordinary-and-compelling reason.

“ORDERED that defendant's motion for compassionate release (Docket 42) is granted.”

Procedural preferences

He resolves criminal suppression motions by adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after de novo review, upholding stops, searches, and warrants he finds supported by probable cause.

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's motion to suppress (Docket 45) is denied.”

Cautions

A compassionate-release motion is denied where the asserted health risk is marginal and unaccompanied by other risk-elevating conditions; a generalized concern does not meet the extraordinary-and-compelling threshold.

“ORDERED that defendant's motion for compassionate release (Docket 218) is denied.”

In professional-negligence and personal-injury cases he grants a defendant's summary judgment when the plaintiff fails to produce expert testimony on the applicable standard of care.

“ORDERED that Upshaw's motion for summary judgment (Docket 133) is granted.”

A defendant who fails to plead or otherwise defend after service risks default judgment; he treats willful noncompliance as warranting that relief for the moving party.

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff's motion for default judgment (Docket 8) is granted.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Hamilton v. Bangs, McCullen, Butler, Foye & Simmons, L.L.P.
5:10-cv-05009-JLV · 2011-03-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings (Docket 23), converted to a motion for summary judgment (Docket 30), is granted.”

Widvey v. Morris
5:11-cv-05002-JLV · 2012-02-22
Summary judgment (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion for summary judgment (Docket 24) is denied as moot.”

Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Van Hunnik
5:13-cv-05020-JLV · 2014-01-28
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“ORDERED that defendant Judge Jeff Davis' motion to dismiss (Docket 33) is denied.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Kim Malsam-Rysdon's and Luann Van Hunnik's motions to dismiss (Dockets 36 & 37) are denied.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Mark Vargo's motion to dismiss (Docket 39) is denied.”

Whitecalf v. Young
5:14-cv-05072-JLV · 2015-01-15
Motions to stay (plaintiff) Denied

“For these reasons, Mr. Whitecalf's motion to stay his state court sentence is denied. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion (Docket 4) is denied.”

Ellefson v. Kenstler
5:14-cv-05001-JLV · 2014-09-04
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Bastian's motion to dismiss (Docket 8) is denied as moot.”

Motion for more definite statement (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Water Depart. IRR's motion for a more definite statement (Docket 11) is denied as moot.”

Motion for more definite statement (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Sheriff of Butte County's motion for a more definite statement (Docket 13) is denied as moot.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Seaman's motion to dismiss (Docket 17) is denied as moot.”

Kurtenbach v. Gross
5:13-cv-05024-JLV · 2014-02-27
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motions to dismiss (Dockets 4 and 7) are moot.”

Motions to stay (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion to appoint counsel (Docket 11), motion to stay (Docket 12), and motion to have the court take judicial notice (Docket 14) are moot.”

Noftsger v. United States
5:12-cv-05019-JLV · 2014-03-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that the government's motion for summary judgment (Docket 15) is granted.”

Higgins v. Upshaw Consulting Services, LLC
5:16-cv-05010-JLV · 2020-05-05
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that Upshaw's motion for summary judgment (Docket 133) is granted.”

Higgins v. Upshaw Consulting Services, LLC
5:16-cv-05010-JLV · 2020-02-25
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that defendant Five Star's motion for summary judgment (Docket 93) is granted.”

Motions to stay (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Five Star's motion to stay discovery (Docket 96) and defendant Continental's motion for joinder (Docket 98) are denied as moot.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Continental's motion for summary judgment (Docket 117) is granted.”

Higgins v. Upshaw Consulting Services, LLC
5:16-cv-05010-JLV · 2019-06-10
Motion to appoint counsel (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Docket 110) is denied without prejudice.”

Reynolds White v. United States
5:11-cv-05058-JLV · 2014-09-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's motion (Docket 23) is denied with respect to the motion for dismissal and judgment is reserved with respect to the motion for summary judgment.”

United States v. Pourier
5:12-cv-05088-JLV · 2014-03-03
Default judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff's motion for default judgment (Docket 8) is granted.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The sample is weighted toward Viken's 2020-2022 senior-status docket, which is heavy in criminal, magistrate, and screening matters and is not representative of his active-service civil docket. Prominent merits work, including the 2013-2014 Van Hunnik ICWA litigation, predates the sampled window, and civil cases from 2011 through 2019 are underrepresented.

A historical record

Judge Viken 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.