Hilda G. Tagle
Judge Tagle no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Tagle decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On habeas review Tagle gives strong AEDPA deference to state-court factual findings, including implicit credibility determinations; a petitioner must rebut them with clear and convincing evidence, and reweighing the facts before the state court is not the federal court's role.
“In order to overcome the presumption in favor of the state court's factual findings, Musich carries the burden of rebutting this account with clear and convincing evidence, which he has not done.”
Procedural preferences
Tagle works through a magistrate-judge referral model and adopts well-reasoned M&Rs; she reviews objected-to portions de novo but declines de novo review of objections that are 'frivolous, conclusive or general in nature.'
“if the objections are frivolous, conclusive or general in nature the court need not conduct a de novo review.”
Cautions
In removed diversity cases Tagle scrutinizes post-removal amendments that would add a non-diverse defendant under the Hensgens factors; an amendment filed without leave, after the plaintiff knew the defendant's identity, and timed to support a remand motion is treated as dilatory and aimed at defeating jurisdiction, and is struck.
“the Court finds that the purpose of Lewis Mechanical's first amended petition is to defeat jurisdiction.”
For prisoner litigants the PLRA three-strikes bar (28 U.S.C. 1915(g)) is enforced; the 'imminent danger' exception requires a real and proximate threat, not a speculative risk of future harm.
“in order to meet the imminent danger requirement of 1915(g), the threat must be 'real and proximate.'”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety, Dkt. No 37. The Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections, Dkt. No. 42. The Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiff's claims.”
“GRANTS Respondent's motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 15”
“ADOPTS the M&R addressing Defendants' motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 11, and GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. No. 8;”
“ADOPTS the M&R addressing Garrett's motion for judgment, Dkt. No. 19, and DENIES Garrett's Motion for Judgment, Dkt. No. 12.”
“Lewis Mechanical's Motion to Remand, Dkt. No. 7, is DENIED.”
“GRANTS Union Standard Insurance Group, LLC's Motion to Dismiss Under FRCP 12(b)(6), Dkt. No. 10;”
“GRANTS Defendant Union Insurance Company's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's First Amended Petition, Dkt. No. 12;”
“DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Petition, Dkt. No. 30;”
“STRIKES AS MOOT: o David Girard's Motion to Dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(6), Dkt. No. 16;”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 159.5 days (N = 12).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 91.5 days (N = 4).
Several cases terminated within days of filing (e.g. Teague v. Director TDCJ 5d) consistent with prisoner screening / transfer; not entry-read, so dispositions are not characterized. Reported as caseload metadata only.
A historical record
Judge Tagle 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.