Bernice Bouie Donald

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee district Retired 2011 · served 1995–2011 Appointed by Bill Clinton (Democratic) 21 signed orders read

Judge Donald no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Donald decides

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

What persuades

She rejected a discovery sanction that would decide the merits indirectly when the record did not establish willfulness, prior warnings, or inadequate lesser sanctions.

“the Court does not view this as a simple request for preclusion but as a backdoor route to judgment.”

When interpreting a public-services contract, she used the text, the parties' practical construction, and the surrounding record to resolve ambiguity rather than send a single reasonable interpretation to trial.

“the evidence indicates that ICF/MR residents are categorically included in the term ‘community’ and thus are eligible for CSN coverage.”

Procedural preferences

She treated collective-action procedure as a practical comparison of shared practices against material differences, rather than requiring every class member's proof to be identical.

“the differences among the plaintiffs outweigh the similarities of the practices to which they were allegedly subjected.”

She enforced arbitration-waiver principles when a party delayed invoking an agreement while the opposing party incurred the costs of extensive federal litigation.

“Torrid had actual notice of the existence of an arbitration clause for over three years before the present motion was filed”

Cautions

At summary judgment she required admissible evidence rather than hearsay or an opponent's lack of documentation, particularly where ownership and forfeiture remained disputed.

“the Government has offered no competent evidence to establish that the vehicle instead belongs to Floyd”

Signed rulings

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

Signature Combs, Inc. v. United States
· 2004-07-13
Motion for preclusion (plaintiffs) Denied

“the Court denies Plaintiffs’ motion for preclusion as a discovery sanction under Rule 37(c).”

Motion for leave to supplement (plaintiffs) Moot / procedural

“The Court also DENIES Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to supplement their opposition to Dll’s motion for summary judgment as moot.”

Highway & Local Motor Freight Employees Local Union No. 667 v. Wells Lamont Corp.
· 2001-10-22
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiffs motion is DENIED”

United States v. Tennessee
· 2009-07-08
Summary judgment (intervenor People First of Tennessee) Granted

“People First’s motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED”

Summary judgment (defendants State of Tennessee et al.) Denied

“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED”

Monroe v. FTS USA, LLC
· 2011-02-07
Motion to decertify class (defendants) Denied

“ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DECERTIFY CLASS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied
United States v. One 1973 Chevrolet Impala VIN 1L47H3S204495
· 2009-08-07
Motion to strike or summary judgment (government) Denied

“the Government’s motion to strike Claimant’s claim and answer or in the alternative for summary judgment is DENIED”

Thomas & Betts Corp. v. Hayes
· 2002-09-16
Motions to transfer (defendants) Granted

“this Court grants Defendants’ motions to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Massachusetts”

Ham v. Swift Transportation Co.
· 2011-07-01
Class certification (Ham and Broadnax plaintiffs) Granted

“the motion of the Ham and Broadnax Plaintiffs for certification of a class under Rule 23(b)(3) is GRANTED”

Class certification (Lott and Pascarella plaintiffs) Granted in part

“The motion of the Lott and Pascarella Plaintiffs for class certification is DENIED as to certification of a class under Rule 23(b)(1)(A), but GRANTED as to certification of a class under Rule 23(b)(3).”

Motion for interim class counsel (Ham plaintiffs) Moot / procedural

“the Ham Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(g) Motion for Appointment of Watson Burns, PLLC, as Interim Class Counsel filed December 10, 2010, is STRICKEN AS MOOT”

Monroe v. FTS USA, LLC
· 2009-03-17
Class certification (plaintiffs) Granted

“Plaintiffs’ motion to conditionally certify class is GRANTED”

Little v. Tennessee Student Assistance Corp.
· 2008-03-21
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“TSAC’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Complaint is dismissed.”

Entertainment Productions, Inc. v. Shelby County
· 2008-04-23
Preliminary injunction (plaintiffs) Denied

“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED”

Pendleton Pines Associates, L.L.C. v. Ledic Management, L.L.C.
· 2005-02-03
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

“the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss”

Sutton v. St. Jude Medical, Inc.
· 2003-11-25
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss on the basis of Rule 12(b)(1)”

A historical record

Judge Donald 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.