William Lynn Campbell Jr.
How Judge Campbell rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Campbell decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On summary judgment in employment-discrimination cases applies the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework and will let a Title VII claim reach a jury where the employer's stated rationale shifts over time.
“An employer's changing rationale for making an adverse employment decision can be evidence of pretext. ... a reasonable jury could determine that NIRVC’s proffered reason was pretext for discrimination.”
Procedural preferences
In statutory interpretation begins with the plain language and treats a list introduced by 'may include' as illustrative and non-exhaustive (here the TN Pregnant Worker's Fairness Act reasonable-accommodation list).
“the statute provides that ‘Reasonable Accommodation may include’ the accommodations provided, demonstrating that the listed accommodations, while instructive, are not exhaustive or exclusive.”
Routinely adopts unobjected-to Magistrate Judge Reports & Recommendations after independent review; the M.D. Tenn. magistrate bench (Newbern, Frensley, Holmes) does much of the dispositive-motion screening he then adopts.
“The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 202) and concludes that it should be ADOPTED and APPROVED.”
Cautions
For a Title VII religious-discrimination claim, requires the plaintiff to identify a sincerely-held religious belief that conflicts with an employment requirement AND to have informed the employer of that belief; a leave request for a medical procedure is not by itself an expression of religious belief. (Note: this particular dismissal was later vacated on reconsideration.)
“Felts’ leave request ‘is not an expression of religious belief’ and does not by itself ‘plausibly show that [Felts] informed [NIRVC] [of] her alleged religious beliefs.’”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“NIRVC’s motion will be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“DOE’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 25) is GRANTED, and the matter is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.”
“the ZK Ranches Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 141) is DENIED.”
“The Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Hensley, Barnett, and Mink (Doc. No. 159) is GRANTED”
“the Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Parker and Williams (Doc. No. 168) is GRANTED.”
“the motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 44) is DENIED as moot.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 24) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“GRANTED in part and DENIED in part and the Court ORDERS as follows”
“motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. No. 39) will be DENIED”
“DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 61) is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 475 days (N = 7).
The sampled civil docket includes False Claims Act, consumer-credit, disability and employment discrimination, immigration mandamus, insurance-coverage, and prisoner civil-rights matters, alongside a substantial federal criminal docket. Many civil cases are referred to magistrate judges.
Draft for Judge Campbell with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Campbell, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Campbell's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace