Kevin Hunter Sharp

How Judge Sharp rules, drawn from 10 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Position
district
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
2011-05-03
Education
Christian Brothers College, B.S. (1990); Vanderbilt University Law School, J.D. (1993)
Signed orders read
10

How Judge Sharp decides

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

What persuades

Sharp treated comparative-fault allocations as trial questions when the record permitted competing views of responsibility.

“comparative fault is a question of fact within the jury’s province, which should not lightly be invaded by the trial court.”

Procedural preferences

At the pleading stage, Sharp allowed fact-dependent claims to proceed while expressly leaving room to revisit them on a developed summary-judgment record.

“The foregoing rulings may be revisited in the context of a motion for summary judgment after the factual record has been developed.”

Cautions

Sharp distinguished lawful preparation to compete from allegations of taking company material and soliciting employees while still employed.

“ProductiveMD’s allegations go far beyond mere preparation to compete.”

Signed rulings

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

ProductiveMD, LLC v. 4UMD, LLC
· 2011-09-27
Judgment on the pleadings (defendants) Granted in part

“The Court will grant in part, and deny in part, Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.”

Motion to ascertain status (defendants) Moot / procedural

“With those ruling, Defendants’ Motion to Ascertain Status (Docket No. 62) is rendered moot.”

Zander v. Katz, Sapper & Miller, LLP
· 2014-06-13
Summary judgment (defendant Katz, Sapper & Miller, LLP) Denied

“the Court will DENY Defendant Katz, Sapper & Miller, LLP’s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 69)”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied

“DENY Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment (Docket No. 97)”

Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Denied

“DENY Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 71)”

Motions to strike (plaintiffs) Denied

“DENY Plaintiffs’ motion to strike (Docket No. 88).”

Town of Smyrna v. Municipal Gas Authority
· 2015-09-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“denying the Gas Authority’s Motion to Dismiss as moot”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“denying its Motion for Summary Judgment on Smyrna’s TFCA, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and damages claims.”

Deschamps v. Bridgestone Americas, Inc. Salaried Employees Retirement Plan
· 2015-09-09
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment”

Summary judgment (defendants) Granted in part
Bridgestone Americas, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp.
· 2016-03-22
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (Docket Entry No. 143) will be granted in part and denied in part.”

SPO Go Holdings, Inc. v. W & O Construction Co.
· 2016-05-06
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“an appropriate Order denying W&O’s Partial Motion to Dismiss will be entered.”

Strong v. HMA Fentress County General Hospital, LLC
· 2016-07-12
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted in part

“Defendants are entitled to dismissal of (1) all claims against Crabtree, except for the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim; (2) a claim for malicious harassment; and (3) the common law claim for retaliation against the Hospital.”

Blatt v. Capital One Auto Finance, Inc.
· 2017-02-17
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court will grant Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“deny Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment.”

Hajizadeh v. Vanderbilt University
· 2012-07-19
Summary judgment (defendant Vanderbilt University) Granted in part

“the Court will grant in part and deny in part Defendant Vanderbilt’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 35).”

Summary judgment (defendant Drake) Denied

“The Court will also deny Defendant Drake’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 39)”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“will deny Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against Defendant Vanderbilt University (Docket Entry No. 42).”

Okolo v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville
· 2012-08-30
Motions to strike (defendant Metro) Denied

“Metro’s motion to strike is DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant Metro) Granted

“Defendant Metro’s motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED with respect to all claims against Metro. They are dismissed without prejudice.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant Metro) Moot / procedural

“Metro’s motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant Gallagher) Granted in part

“Defendant Gallagher’s motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant Gallagher) Moot / procedural

“Gallagher’s motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Motion to stay discovery (defendant Gallagher) Moot / procedural

“Gallagher’s motion to stay discovery is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Motion for relief under local rule (defendants) Denied

“The joint motion for relief under Local Rule 83.03 is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 100 days (N = 13).

The thirteen sampled closed matters include civil-rights, labor, contract, consumer, bankruptcy, habeas, Social Security, and personal-injury disputes. The sample is too small to represent the full caseload.

Draft for Judge Sharp with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Sharp, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Sharp's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace