Susan K. Lee
Judge Lee no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Lee decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a suggestive eyewitness-identification challenge, the judge did not stop at the government's concession that the procedure was suggestive; she independently worked through each of the Neil v. Biggers reliability factors before concluding suppression was unwarranted.
“After considering the five factors set forth by the Supreme Court in Neil, I find Nopper's identification of Buford is reliable and due process does not require the exclusion of testimony of her identification.”
On a motion to compel discovery in an employment-discrimination case, she calibrated the scope of 'me too' discovery to the specific supervisors alleged to be involved in the challenged decision, rather than granting either party's more extreme all-or-nothing proposal.
“Based on the current record and considering the jurisprudence referenced above and the argument of counsel, the Court finds the balance weighs in favor of allowing limited discovery as set forth below.”
Procedural preferences
She reads deadlines as real deadlines -- a discovery motion filed even a few days after the discovery cutoff, without a good-faith-conferral certification, will be denied as untimely rather than excused.
“Courts routinely hold that motions seeking court intervention in discovery disputes after the close of discovery are untimely absent special or extreme circumstances.”
Facing a party who simply stopped responding to motions, she granted the unopposed relief but paired it with a firm push toward private mediation rather than letting the case drift toward trial by default.
“the parties are ORDERED to engage in private mediation to attempt to resolve this case. Unless this case is resolved sooner by agreement, the parties SHALL participate in private mediation with a mutually agreed-upon mediator by no later than August 15, 2024.”
On sanctions and dismissal requests over discovery delay, she reserves case-ending remedies for genuine bad faith and reads the four-factor willfulness/prejudice/warning/lesser-sanctions test literally before recommending anything more severe than a warning.
“I conclude they did not act with willfulness, bad faith, or fault. Moreover, and in spite of Defendant's protests to the contrary, I also conclude that Defendant is not prejudiced in any significant manner as a result of the discovery violation.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“I RECOMMEND that Defendants' motions to dismiss be DENIED.”
“I RECOMMEND1 that Plaintiff's motion to amend [Doc. 10] be DENIED, with leave to refile a new motion in compliance with the local rules.”
“Accordingly, I RECOMMEND Plaintiff's motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 2 & 5] be DENIED. ... if Plaintiff pays the filing fee, I also RECOMMEND the amended complaint be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”
“For the reasons stated herein, it is RECOMMENDED that Buford's motion to suppress [Doc. No. 18] be DENIED.”
“Accordingly, the motion to compel [Doc. 40] is DENIED.”
“Defendants did not file a response to either of Plaintiff's motions, and the time for doing so has passed. ... Accordingly, both motions [Doc. 56 & Doc. 57] are GRANTED as unopposed.”
“Accordingly, the aspect of Defendants' unopposed motion seeking to compel full and compete discovery responses to the outstanding interrogatories and requests for production is GRANTED”
“Plaintiffs' motion to compel Defendants' to further respond to their discovery request [Doc. 22] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: Defendants will produce ... a copy of all EEOC charges, lawsuits, and complaints ... asserted by an African American sales representative in the Chattanooga Branch ... and ... in any of the branch offices in the Southeast Region ... but only if the alleged race discrimination involved a claim against a branch manager who was under the supervision of Pope or White.”
“For the above stated reasons, I RECOMMEND3 that Defendant's motion for dismissal and sanctions [Doc. 53] be DENIED”
“it is RECOMMENDED that Holloway's Section 2254 habeas corpus petition [Doc. No. 3] be DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“I RECOMMEND1 as follows: 1. That the joint motion for approval of settlement [Doc. 19] be GRANTED; 2. That the settlement with respect to Plaintiff's FLSA claim be APPROVED as a fair and reasonable compromise of bona fide issues of law and fact”
“In the R&R, the magistrate judge recommends that plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 18] be granted in part and defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 23] be denied. ... plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 18] is GRANTED IN PART and defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 23] is DENIED. The Commissioner's decision denying benefits is REVERSED AND REMANDED”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Her docket spans a full generalist magistrate caseload across two decades: Social Security disability appeals (both her own consent-jurisdiction decisions and referred R&Rs), prisoner civil-rights and habeas matters, employment discrimination (Title VII, FLSA), personal-injury and products-liability removals and diversity suits, general contract disputes, and, as a duty/referral magistrate, criminal complaints, search warrants, detention hearings, and plea colloquies. A products-liability personal-injury case (Edge v. The Legends at White Oak) shows her presiding over a fully-consented civil case through summary judgment and a pretrial sanctions/motion-in-limine ruling before it settled on the eve of trial.
A historical record
Judge Lee 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.