Elizabeth S. Chestney
How Judge Chestney decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a motion to compel arbitration, recommends compelling individual (not class/collective) arbitration while denying the balance of the request.
“Defendant's Motion (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Defendant's request to compel individual arbitration and DENIED in all other respects.”
Recommends denying an employer's summary judgment on FLSA claims where fact disputes remain, adopted over the defendant's objections.
“New Leaf's objections... are overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge's recommendation that the Court DENY New Leaf's motions for summary judgment on Plaintiffs' FLSA claims.”
Procedural preferences
On a Rule 12 motion, parses claims individually and recommends granting in part / denying in part, letting the adequately-pleaded discrimination claims proceed.
“the Court ADOPTS IN PART, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation, and Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 29) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART... the only claims that survive for now are Brauckmiller's Title VII race and sex discrimination claims...”
Cautions
On cross-motions for summary judgment, recommends denying the movant where the record shows a triable issue rather than resolving liability outright.
“First Tech's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 105) is DENIED, and Parsell's motion for partial summary judgment on liability (ECF No. 102) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant's Motion (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED with respect to Defendant's request to compel individual arbitration and DENIED in all other respects.”
“First Tech's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 105) is DENIED, and Parsell's motion for partial summary judgment on liability (ECF No. 102) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“Parsell's motion for partial summary judgment on liability (ECF No. 102) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Court concludes that Parsell is entitled to summary judgment on her claim that First Tech violated the FCRA by failing to conduct an investigation in response to any of the first five ACDVs... The motion is denied in all other respects.”
“New Leaf's objections... are overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge's recommendation that the Court DENY New Leaf's motions for summary judgment on Plaintiffs' FLSA claims.”
“the Court ADOPTS IN PART, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation, and Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 29) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART... the only claims that survive for now are Brauckmiller's Title VII race and sex discrimination claims...”
In this Chapter 13 bankruptcy appeal, the self-represented appellants neither paid the filing fee nor confirmed that they wished to proceed after Judge Chestney issued a show-cause order. She recommended dismissal for failure to prosecute, and the district judge adopted the recommendation. This was a court-initiated dismissal rather than a ruling on a party motion; the request to proceed without prepayment became moot.
In this self-represented civil-rights case concerning a utility pedestal and easement, Judge Chestney granted leave to proceed without prepayment of fees, denied appointment of counsel, and recommended dismissal for failure to state a claim. She found no state actor as to the private company, no plausible constitutional deprivation, and untimeliness. The district judge adopted the recommendation. This was statutory screening rather than a ruling on a party motion.
In this self-represented civil-rights case, the plaintiff sought federal supervision of state criminal proceedings and return of seized property. Judge Chestney recommended dismissal based on judicial immunity, lack of federal jurisdiction over the property claims, and failure to state a claim. Judge Jason Pulliam reviewed for clear error and adopted the recommendation. This was statutory screening rather than a ruling on a party motion.
“it is recommended that the District Court deny both motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction”
“it is recommended that the Petition [#1] be denied”
Grants in forma pauperis status and recommends dismissal of the pro se complaint under the screening statute for failure to state a claim.
“motion [#53] be GRANTED”
“motions [#50, #52] be DENIED”
“Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#2] be DENIED”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Judge Chestney sits in the San Antonio Division and receives civil referrals from Judges Xavier Rodriguez and Jason Pulliam. In cases handled with the parties' consent, she serves as the judge of record. The largest group reviewed consists of twenty completed Social Security appeals, alongside labor, employment, and consumer-finance matters.
Put Judge Chestney's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Chestney actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Chestney's own signed orders and cites them.