Richard A. Schell
How Judge Schell rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Schell no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Schell
Richard A. Schell served as a United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Texas after receiving his commission in June 1988. He was chief judge from 1994 to 2001 and assumed senior status in March 2015. He became an inactive senior judge in June 2023.
How Judge Schell decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
At the pleading stage, he required plausible factual allegations but did not require a plaintiff to prove the case in the complaint.
“Motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) are disfavored and are rarely granted.”
He resolved ambiguous insurance-policy language in favor of the insured when the exclusion was not clear from the policy and pleadings.
“any doubt on that issue must be resolved in the insured’s favor.”
He treated the written terms of benefit plans and the administrative record as central in disability-benefit review.
“A claims administrator commits an abuse of discretion only if it acts ‘arbitrarily or capriciously.’”
Cautions
He excluded evidence that did not satisfy authentication and admissibility requirements at summary judgment.
“Because Meh-men appears to have no opposition to Collin County’s Motion to Strike, and because the court finds the Motion to be independently meritorious, Collin County’s Objection to the Holstein email is sustained.”
He treated personal jurisdiction as a threshold requirement and dismissed without prejudice when the defendant lacked sufficient forum contacts.
“Because the court has found it does not have personal jurisdiction, it will not address the subject-matter jurisdiction argument.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the motion is hereby DENIED.”
“the United States’ motion for partial summary judgment (docket entry # 9) is hereby GRANTED.”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (de # 21) should be, and hereby is, DENIED.”
“the ‘Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment’ (de # 26) should be, and hereby is, GRANTED.”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED”
“Defendants’ Motion to Strike Affidavits of Lillie Parker is DENIED”
“Plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“the court hereby GRANTS the ‘Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment’ (docket entry # 49).”
“Collin County’s Motion to Strike should be, and hereby is, GRANTED.”
“Mehmen’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment should be, and hereby is DENIED.”
“Collin County’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and hereby is, GRANTED with respect to the merits of Mehmen’s pursuit of a declaratory judgment”
“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (docket entry # 18) is GRANTED;”
“Plaintiffs cross-motion for partial summary judgment (docket entry # 24) is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that the Plaintiffs motion to alter or amend judgment (docket entry # 35) is hereby DENIED.”
“the Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and hereby is, DENIED.”
“the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and hereby is, GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that Defendant MySpace, Ine.’s motion to dismiss (docket entry # 17) is hereby GRANTED.”
“Accordingly, the Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss should be denied.”
“Defendant Medical Center of McKinney’s dispositive Rule 12b motion to dismiss (docket entry #35) is DENIED as well.”
“Accordingly, that portion of the Defendants’ motion seeking a transfer is MOOT.”
“Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss is accordingly GRANTED and the Plaintiffs claims are hereby DISMISSED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 334 days (N = 20).
The bounded early-2008 enumeration contains twenty terminated cases. It is a narrow archival slice, not a career-wide caseload measure.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 1 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
A historical record
Judge Schell no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.