Sam S. Sheldon
Judge Sheldon no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Sheldon decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On agency review under the APA, defers to a longstanding, consistently applied agency interpretation that gives effect to the regulatory text and comports with congressional intent; the challenger must show the determination was plainly erroneous or unreasonable, not merely that a different reading is possible.
“Plaintiff has not shown that this was a plainly erroneous determination, much less an unreasonable determination. The agency has made a 'rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.'”
Procedural preferences
Declines to develop a party's underdeveloped argument: where the defendant asserted UCC preemption of an unjust-enrichment claim without explaining which subsection applied or citing supporting precedent, he refused to construct the argument and denied that branch of the motion.
“without further argument as to how either provision preempts a claim for unjust enrichment, the Court is unpersuaded. ... It is not the Court's task to develop this argument and thus, the Court need not address it further at this time.”
Cautions
Parses multi-claim complaints claim-by-claim under Rule 12(b)(6), dismissing with prejudice the theories foreclosed as a matter of law (e.g., a common-law cause of action displaced by the UCC, or a negligence claim where the bank owes no duty to a non-customer) while letting adequately pleaded theories survive.
“the common law cause of action for money had and received has been supplanted by Chapter 4 of the UCC. ... The Court, therefore, agrees with Defendant that the cause of action is not supplemental to the UCC and is instead displaced by it”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court RECOMMENDS: (1) Plaintiff's Motions for Summary Judgment against Curtin, the Port, and the Federal Defendants (Dkt. No. 24, 40), be DENIED;”
“(2) Defendant Curtin's Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) (Dkt. No. 13), be GRANTED;”
“(3) Defendant the Port's Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) (Dkt. No. 14), be GRANTED;”
“(4) Federal Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 41), be GRANTED.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint be GRANTED and the case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“The Court FURTHER RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's Opposed Motion to Amend First Amended Complaint and Plaintiff's Opposed Motion to Supplement its Motion to Amend the First Amended Complaint be DENIED.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. ... Plaintiff sufficiently states a claim for unjust enrichment, conversion, and breach of fiduciary duty (Claims II, IV, and VII). ... Plaintiff does not sufficiently state a claim for money had and received, negligence, gross negligence (Claims I, V, and VI).”
“Defendants' second Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 10) be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiffs' unlawful entry, false arrest, and excessive force claims under the Fourth Amendment and retaliation claim under the First Amendment against Officer Defendants should survive. All other claims should be dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS the Motion for Final Summary Judgment be GRANTED as to any claims that arise under the first three insurance policies and DENIED as to any claims that arise under the fourth policy.”
A historical record
Judge Sheldon 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.