Raymond Alvin Jackson
How Judge Jackson rules, drawn from 13 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Jackson
Raymond Alvin Jackson is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Jackson received a commission on November 22, 1993. Judge Jackson assumed senior status on November 23, 2021.
Judge Jackson's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Jackson's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge Jackson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He construes the removal statutes strictly and resolves jurisdictional doubt in favor of remand, holding the removing party to its burden of proving complete diversity, and applying Carden, he treats an LLC's or unincorporated association's citizenship as that of ALL its members.
“If federal jurisdiction is doubtful, remand to state court is required.”
In Little v. Bank of America, he granted the bank's Rule 12(b)(6) motion in part and denied it in part on the homeowner's TILA claims.
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
In a 2026 insurance coverage dispute, he tested the proposed coverage theory against the commercial policy’s named insured and the pleaded use of the driver’s personal vehicle, dismissing when the complaint did not plausibly connect that use to the policy.
“the Court cannot find, on these allegations, that any reasonable interpretation of the Policy would suggest that Williams driving his personal car in a personal capacity might be covered by this commercial business policy issued to a limited liability corporation.”
Procedural preferences
In School Board of Norfolk v. Brown, he affirmed the IDEA hearing officer's decision in part and reversed it in part.
“the final decision of the due process hearing officer is AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.”
He reserves removal-related fee awards for bad-faith or patently baseless removals, declining to shift fees where the removing party had an objectively reasonable basis.
“This Court has generally declined to award attorneys fees unless it was patently obvious that federal jurisdiction was lacking or the notice of removal was filed in bad faith.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Based on the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand is GRANTED and the request for attorneys fees and costs's DENIED.”
“the Court finds that the record does not reflect that Defendants removed this case in bad faith or to prolong the litigation. Accordingly, the Court will exercise its discretion to deny Plaintiffs an award of attorneys fees and expenses.”
“Defendants' Motions (# 3, # 4, #5, #8, and # 13) are DISMISSED as moot.”
Bench-trial judgment in an admiralty negligence action under the Public Vessels Act and the Suits in Admiralty Act, 33 U.S.C. 905(b), brought by a civilian installation technician whose foot was amputated after a Navy forklift ran over it aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt. After a three-day trial, Jackson awarded judgment to the United States. An earlier summary-judgment opinion in the consolidated case, denying the plaintiff's motion and granting co-defendant Wiggins's motion, is a separate order reported at 694 F. Supp. 2d 460. Byline: 'RAYMOND A. JACKSON, District Judge.'
“On January 27, 2010, the Court denied Plaintiffs Motion and granted Defendant's Motion.”
“Plaintiff School Board of the City of Norfolk's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part; ... and the final decision of the due process hearing officer is AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.”
“Defendant Brown's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part;”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 10, is DENIED, and the Final Decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.”
“Based on the foregoing reasons. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.”
“For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff s Motion to Amend is GRANTED. Defendant’s Motion to Realign or Disregard Certain Parties is GRANTED in part. Plaintiff s Motion to Remand is DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. ECF No. 25.”
“the United States’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED. The Complaint is dismissed without prejudice.”
“MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 7 Motion for Default Judgment. The Court ENTERS a default judgment against Defendant, Donna R. Martorella, in the amount of $196,465.90, plus accrued interest.”
“the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. ECF No. 3.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Senior judge sitting in the Norfolk and Newport News Divisions.
- His docket runs heavily to pro-se prisoner civil-rights suits and state/federal habeas petitions (28 U.S.C. 2254/2241), Social Security disability appeals, and short diversity removals, alongside a thinner band of contested commercial litigation (diversity fraud, consumer credit/FCRA, construction-finance and surety disputes) and employment cases.
- Qualitative mix from the enumerated dockets, not a counted distribution.
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 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 3 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 1 | 3 |
| Sep 2021 | 1 | 4 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2020 | 3 | 2 |
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.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, not for Judge Jackson: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 3,011 | 5.6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,204 | 5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,299 | 4.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 493 | 8.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 15 | 19.3 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 3,011 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,613 | 5.3 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,194 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,134 | 6.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,152 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,860 | 6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,267 | 5.9 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Jackson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Jackson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Jackson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace