Jon Phipps McCalla
Judge McCalla no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge McCalla decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a civil-forfeiture case, treated undisputed facts drawn from the claimant's own guilty-plea stipulation as sufficient to establish the substantial connection between a vehicle and drug trafficking that the government must prove -- a claimant's own admissions at a change-of-plea hearing carry real weight even when he separately contests how the evidence was gathered.
“It is undisputed that on January 4, 2014, Wright drove the Defendant vehicle... to the Cinnamon Trails Apartments... Wright stipulated at the change of plea hearing that he was transporting approximately 282 Oxycodone and 400 Dilaudid pills that he intended to sell.”
On a Section 2255 motion, relied on his own recollection from presiding at the underlying criminal trial rather than treating the ineffective-assistance claim as a fresh factual dispute -- a judge who tried the case will use that firsthand knowledge to resolve a post-conviction claim about counsel's trial strategy without necessarily ordering a new evidentiary hearing.
“Where the judge considering the Sec. 2255 motion also presided over the criminal case, the judge may rely on his or her recollection of the prior case.”
In a Fourteenth Amendment state-created-danger claim over a domestic-violence death, distinguished between a municipality's Monell liability (which requires a pled policy or custom, not just a bad outcome in one case) and the individual officers' liability (where the same allegedly deliberate-indifferent conduct was enough to survive dismissal) -- the same facts can defeat a claim against the government entity while surviving against the individuals who acted.
“Plaintiff's Amended Complaint does not assert or point to a government policy or custom such that liability can attach to Shelby County or the City of Memphis... Shelby County's and City of Memphis's Motions to Dismiss the Sec. 1983 Substantive Due Process Claims against them are GRANTED.”
Procedural preferences
Enforces the local rule that a motion to reconsider an interlocutory order must specifically identify one of the enumerated grounds for revision (new law, new evidence, or a manifest failure to consider material facts) -- a motion that just re-argues the merits without naming a ground will be denied on that procedural basis alone, and an unauthorized reply brief filed without leave will be struck.
“Plaintiff fails to identify the procedural basis for its Motion for Reconsideration... Because Plaintiff has not specifically shown any of the grounds enumerated in Local Rule 7.3(b), Plaintiff is not entitled to reconsideration of the Court's interlocutory order.”
On a defamation claim, expects a plaintiff to commit to a specific legal theory -- libel or slander -- and plead its distinct elements rather than a generic defamation claim, since the two carry different statutes of limitations; a plaintiff who cannot make that election will be dismissed with leave to amend rather than denied outright.
“Plaintiff fails to name a cause of action as he fails to plead slander or libel, instead relying on generic defamation claim; and... fails to plead the elements of the cause of action with enough specificity.”
Cautions
Will not rule in advance on the rights of absent parties in a putative class action -- a defendant cannot get an early, binding ruling on unnamed class members' claims before a class is certified, because those individuals are not yet before the court and any such ruling would be an impermissible advisory opinion.
“If the Court were to nonetheless rule on those individuals' claims, the Court would be issuing an advisory opinion... The Constitution forbids this.”
Holds pro se litigants to the same judicial-estoppel consequences as represented parties for nondisclosures in a related bankruptcy case -- reliance on an attorney's error, even if it could support a separate malpractice or ineffective-assistance theory, does not excuse a failure to disclose a pending claim to the bankruptcy court.
“Regardless of whether or not his attorney is to blame for not updating the bankruptcy filings earlier... Plaintiff is bound by the actions of his attorney.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court GRANTS Defendant King's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.”
“In view of the fact that Defendant has apparently corrected the error in the Notice of Award, as well as the fact that Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant's motion, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint.”
“The Court cannot grant the relief that Defendant seeks... Accordingly, Defendant's motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 64) is converted into a motion for summary judgment and GRANTED. The above-captioned case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the reasons stated herein, the Petition is DENIED and the Respondent's pending motions are also DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Strike is GRANTED.”
“Brown's reliance on Johnson is misplaced because Johnson has no bearing on his sentence... Accordingly, Brown's motion lacks merit and is denied.”
“The Section 2255 motion is without merit and it is DENIED.”
“The motion and the record in this case 'conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.' ... His motion is DENIED.”
“For each of the reasons set forth above, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”
“PSI's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is GRANTED. The instant case is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The general docket includes Section 1983 civil-rights suits (excessive-force, due-process, and equal-protection claims against municipal and county defendants), Section 2255 motions to vacate federal sentences, commercial contract and trademark/patent disputes, Fair Credit Reporting Act claims, employment discrimination suits, motor-vehicle and general personal-injury cases, and federal-debt-recovery and civil-forfeiture actions, drawn from the Western Division in Memphis.
A historical record
Judge McCalla 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.