Charles E. Atchley, Jr.
How Judge Atchley rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Atchley decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
When a party missed the tighter deadline for a motion to alter or amend judgment, the judge construed a late-filed reconsideration motion under the stricter Rule 60(b) standard rather than treating the label the party chose as controlling.
“Plaintiff may proceed only in accordance with Federal Rule Civil Procedure 60(b). This is because motions brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) must be brought within 28 days after the entry of judgment.”
In granting a preliminary injunction against a federal agency, the judge limited the scope of relief to the actual plaintiffs before the court rather than issuing a broader nationwide injunction, following a Sixth Circuit concurrence's caution against universal injunctions.
“The Court is heavily persuaded by this concurrence and concludes that this preliminary injunction should only apply to Plaintiffs.”
Procedural preferences
Atchley will excuse an untimely pro se filing when documented electronic-filing problems and efforts to resolve them establish both good cause and excusable neglect.
“The Court finds these technical issues, combined with Scott Evers’s efforts to resolve them, demonstrate both good cause and excusable neglect for failing to timely object to the Report and Recommendation.”
Cautions
In a Section 1983 false-arrest case, the judge treated a facially valid arrest warrant as a complete defense regardless of the ultimate outcome of the underlying charge, so plaintiffs relying only on a later dismissal of charges (without disputing probable cause at the time of arrest) will not survive a motion to dismiss.
“An arrest pursuant to a facially valid warrant is a complete defense to a constitutional claim for false arrest or false imprisonment made pursuant to Section 1983.”
When screening pro se claims, Atchley distinguishes incurable defects from potentially curable pleading failures and may convert a dismissal to without prejudice even while expressing doubt that amendment will succeed.
“these claims are being dismissed without prejudice only because of Plaintiffs’ pro se status and the Sixth Circuit’s preference for allowing pro se litigants the opportunity to attempt to cure defects in their pleadings.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc 11] is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Section 1983 claims against the City of Clinton and Josh Bunch are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. 10] is GRANTED and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 49] is DENIED. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that Federal Defendants and all their respective officers, agents, employees, attorneys, and persons acting in concert or participation with them are ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from implementing the Interpretation, Dear Educator Letter, Fact Sheet, and the Technical Assistance Document against Plaintiffs.”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 49] is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff has failed to show that the Court erred in its October 4, 2024, Memorandum Opinion and Order. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration [Doc. 36] is DENIED.”
“For reasons that follow, the Motion to Exclude Testimony of Tyler A. Kress, Ph.D. [Case No. 4:16-cv-117, Doc. 309; Case No. 4:16- 118, Doc. 286] and Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Steven Loudon [Case No. 4:16-cv-117, Doc. 311; Case No. 4:16-118, Doc. 288] will be GRANTED IN PART.”
“Because Plaintiffs have not presented any evidence of a specific defect in the subject vehicle that caused their damages, the Motion for Summary Judgment [Case No. 4:16-cv-117, Doc. 316; Case No. 4:16- cv-118, Doc. 293] will be GRANTED and this action DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“As the Court will explain, all of Plaintiff's claims will be dismissed for failure to state a claim. His Motion to Certify Class and Appoint Counsel [Doc. 2] will therefore be DENIED AS MOOT. In addition, Plaintiff cannot meet the requirements for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), which requires that ‘the representative party’ be able ‘to protect fairly and adequately the interests of the class.’”
“Defendants have met their burden of showing they would prevail at trial on the exhaustion issue. Accordingly, Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. 46] will be GRANTED, and this action will be DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“Botezat's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 43], on the other hand, is GRANTED as he has established that Tennessee law does not permit the BZA to review the Planning Commission's approval or denial of a development plan.”
“Accordingly, Downing's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 46] is DENIED.”
“As for Knox County, its Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 49] is GRANTED IN PART to the extent it argues that Downing lacks a statutory right to a BZA appeal and DENIED IN PART to the extent it argues that the Knox County Zoning Ordinance is valid as it currently exists.”
“For the reasons discussed above, the Court GRANTS Petitioner's federal habeas petition in part and ORDERS the Government to provide Petitioner with a bond hearing consistent with § 1226(a) within ten (10) days of entry of this Memorandum Opinion and Order. All other relief requested in the petition is DENIED, as is all other relief sought in Petitioner's reply.”
“Accordingly, Defendants' motion to dismiss [Doc. 53] is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 32] and Supplemental Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 46] are both DENIED.”
“Despite the harms an injunction could inflict on Retreat guests and Covenant Life as a whole, the Court concludes that the equities support granting injunctive relief to Norris.”
“Norris's request for summary judgment is GRANTED as to its claims that Covenant Life circumvented a stop-work order through its use of the garden hose and wrongfully failed to obtain the required permit for that use.”
“Accordingly, Unum's denial of Plaintiff's claim for long-term disability benefits is REVERSED and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the ERISA Record [Doc. 69] is GRANTED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled early-2021 civil docket spans civil-rights and prisoner cases, immigration petitions, removed municipal-law disputes, personal-injury and Social Security appeals, and habeas petitions. One case produced a ruling adopting a magistrate judge's screening recommendation; others were remanded or resolved without a dispositive order in the sampled window.
Draft for Judge Atchley with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Atchley, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Atchley's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace