Christopher H. Steger
How Judge Steger rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Steger
Christopher Harper Steger has served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee since July 2015 and became chief magistrate judge in 2024. Before joining the bench, he practiced employment law and served as counsel for Coca-Cola Enterprises.
Judge Steger's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Steger, 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
The preferred method of communication with the Court is always a formal written motion, filed on the Court's electronic case filing system.
“The preferred method of communication with the Court is always a formal written motion, filed on the Court's electronic case filing system.”
Motions
If an expedited hearing is sought, the parties should file a motion with the Court.
“If an expedited hearing is sought, the parties should file a motion with the Court.”
Discovery
Lawyers should: (1) confer with each other in a civil manner and use their best efforts to resolve discovery disputes promptly; and (2) if unsuccessful in such efforts, bring such disputes to the attention of the Court promptly, preferably in the form of a motion specifying the relief requested.
“Lawyers should: (1) confer with each other in a civil manner and use their best efforts to resolve discovery disputes promptly; and (2) if unsuccessful in such efforts, bring such disputes to the attention of the Court promptly, preferably in the form of a motion specifying the relief requested.”
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 Steger decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Dutton, Steger read adjacent sentences in a search-warrant affidavit together and rejected the defendant’s proposed hypertechnical reading of an informant’s visit.
“Judge Steger rejected this argument, finding that it requires a hypertechnical reading of the Affidavit. ... the commonsense reading is that the CI was on Dutton's property in the preceding 72 hours and saw a quantity of methamphetamine in the living area at that time.”
In Claybrook, Steger rejected a challenge to an arbitration award based on alleged factual errors because those errors did not establish manifest disregard of the law.
“Manifest disregard of the law does not encompass alleged erroneous findings of fact by the arbitrator.”
Procedural preferences
In Ramsey, Steger recommended dismissing a civil-rights case with prejudice after the plaintiff did not comply with a discovery order despite earlier warnings and an opportunity to respond.
“The Court concludes ... that dismissal of this action with prejudice is the appropriate sanction for Plaintiff's failure to comply with this Court's August 3, 2018, discovery order.”
In Parks v. Deibel Laboratories of Tennessee, LLC, he quashed seven broad nonparty subpoenas and ordered the issuing plaintiff to pay fees tied to the motion to quash after finding she had not taken reasonable steps to avoid undue burden.
“Magistrate Judge Steger found that Parks had failed to take reasonable steps to avoid imposing an undue burden on the subpoenaed entities and that sanctions were warranted as a result.”
Cautions
In Ross, Steger declined to recuse after the plaintiff sued judges involved in his earlier cases and made conspiracy allegations that the court found meritless.
“Based on Plaintiff's pattern of suing every judge involved in his lawsuits, the breadth of his conspiracy allegations, and the completely meritless nature of this and prior lawsuits, the Court finds it unnecessary to recuse.”
In Hinson, Steger found no good cause to add parties or claims after the scheduling order’s amendment deadline.
“The Court finds Plaintiffs have not shown good cause to amend the scheduling order to add claims or parties.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons stated herein, it is RECOMMENDED that Ms. Wilson's complaint be DISMISSED with prejudice as a sanction for failure to cooperate in discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a) and (d), and for failure to prosecute her action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a).”
“RECOMMENDED this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(V).”
A pro se plaintiff who had filed at least a dozen lawsuits in the district in three months, suing state-court judges, then federal judges (including the undersigned) whenever a ruling was slow, sued the United States and various officials over the pace of his other cases. Screening the complaint under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2), Judge Steger recommended dismissal as frivolous, for failure to state a claim, and because the defendants were immune from suit; the district judge adopted the recommendation and separately noted the plaintiff had already been referred for consideration of a filing injunction.
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (Doc. 28) will be GRANTED to the limited extent that Plaintiffs seek to amend the original complaint to include additional facts to support causes of action already set forth in the original complaint. ... will be DENIED to the extent that Plaintiffs seek to add a claim for negligent procurement of insurance. ... will be DENIED to the extent that Plaintiffs seek to add unnamed defendants.”
“For the reasons stated herein, it is RECOMMENDED that Defendant's Motion to Suppress [Doc. 17] be DENIED.”
“Magistrate Judge Steger ordered Parks to pay Deibel ‘its reasonable and necessary attorney fees and expenses in connection with Deibel's attorneys' preparation of the Motion to Quash (and supporting brief) [Doc. 56], as well as the court appearance on such motion.’”
“On February 24, 2025, Magistrate Judge Steger entered an Order granting in part and denying in part Parks's January 16, 2025, Motion to Compel and for Sanctions. ... Magistrate Judge Steger ordered Defendants to provide additional information in response to some of Parks's discovery requests but did not sanction Defendants or require them to provide all the information Parks requested.”
“the Court will ACCEPT and ADOPT the R&Rs (Docs. 246, 247) and DENY Defendant's motions to suppress (Doc. 145, 147, 151).”
“the Court will: (1) ACCEPT and ADOPT the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (Doc. 25); (2) DENY Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 20); (3) GRANT the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 23); and (4) AFFIRM the Commissioner's finding that Plaintiff is not disabled under the Social Security Act.”
“Magistrate Judge Steger rejected this argument, finding that it requires a hypertechnical reading of the Affidavit. ... Defendant has not made a substantial preliminary showing that Investigator Brewer 'knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, included a false statement or material omission in the affidavit.'”
“Magistrate Judge Steger was not persuaded by these arguments, recommending the Motion to Suppress be denied. ... The Report and Recommendation [Doc. 118] recommending the Motion to Suppress [Doc. 92] be denied is likewise APPROVED and ADOPTED; Defendant's Motion to Suppress [Doc. 92] is DENIED.”
“Defendants' motion [Doc. 34] will be DENIED, and plaintiff's motion [Doc. 45] will be GRANTED. The Arbitrator's Award will be CONFIRMED pursuant to the FAA, 9 U.S.C. Section 9.”
“Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Defendant's Motion for Attorney Fees under Section 1988 [Doc. 32] be DENIED.”
“The Court will ADOPT the report and recommendation (Doc. 21.) Accordingly, Defendant's motion to suppress is DENIED (Doc. 17.)”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 350 days (N = 10).
His consent-jurisdiction caseload sampled here is dominated by Social Security disability appeals (DIWC/DIWW and SSID Title XVI), with a general referral docket that also includes personal-injury removals (frequently against national retail and shipping companies), employment-discrimination suits, diversity contract disputes, and, as Chief Magistrate Judge, a large volume of criminal-complaint, search-warrant, and detention-related matters.
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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 2 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2024 | 4 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 3 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 1 |
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 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, not for Judge Steger: 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 | 933 | 9.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 139 | 7.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 724 | 9.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 59 | 20.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 11 | 32.4 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 933 | 9.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 845 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 762 | 10.9 months |
| Sep 2022 | 921 | 12.5 months |
| Sep 2021 | 949 | 11.6 months |
| Sep 2020 | 803 | 10 months |
| Sep 2019 | 859 | 12.1 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 Steger with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Steger, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Steger's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace