Elizabeth Kay Dillon
How Judge Dillon rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Dillon
Elizabeth Kay Dillon is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Dillon received a commission on December 19, 2014.
Judge Dillon's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Dillon, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Communicating With Chambers and Related Information ↗
- Pretrial Scheduling Order Jury Trial ↗
- Pretrial Scheduling Order Bench Trial ↗
- ERISA Scheduling Order ↗
Key rules
Contacting chambers
Email proposed orders for entry in Word format to chambers and copy all opposing counsel or unrepresented parties.
“Proposed orders submitted for entry should be sent to chambers by email as a Word formatted attachment to [email protected] and a copy sent to all opposing counsel or unrepresented parties.”
Filing
In the sample jury trial order, send chambers a paper courtesy copy when a dispositive motion, brief and exhibits total 75 or more pages.
“When a dispositive motion, together with its supporting brief and exhibits, consists of 75 or more pages, the filing party must send a paper courtesy copy of the documents to Judge Dillon’s chambers at 210 Franklin Road, S.W., Suite 132, Roanoke, Virginia 24011.”
Motions
In the sample jury trial order, briefs may not exceed 25 pages without leave for good cause.
“Exclusive of any accompanying exhibits, a brief may not exceed 25 pages in length using standard margins and double-spaced lines, unless the filing party first obtains leave of the court after showing good cause why a longer brief is necessary.”
Motions
Under the sample jury trial order, parties seeking a motion hearing must contact the courtroom deputy to set the date.
“The court does not generally schedule motions hearings. Such scheduling is the responsibility of the parties. Any party requesting a hearing must contact Kelly Anglim, Courtroom Deputy Clerk, by email or telephone to set a hearing date.”
Motions
Under the sample ERISA order, the plaintiff must brief the benefit claim and object to record authenticity within 30 days after service of the administrative record.
“The plaintiff must file a brief, stating the grounds on which benefits or other relief are claimed, within 30 days after the administrative record is served upon the plaintiff. At the same time, the plaintiff must file any objections to the authenticity of the administrative record.”
Discovery
Under the sample bench trial order, parties changing disclosure or discovery deadlines by agreement must file their plan.
“The parties may, but are not required to, file an agreed written plan pursuant to Rule 26(f), except that the plan must be filed if the parties amend this order’s disclosure or discovery provisions, which the parties may do by agreement and without seeking leave of court.”
Discovery
Under the sample bench trial order, seek leave by separate motion to change deadlines beyond disclosure and discovery.
“agreed written plan purports to change any deadlines other than the disclosure and discovery deadlines, the parties shall file a separate motion requesting leave to amend this order and shall submit a proposed agreed order with the modified deadlines.”
Discovery
Under the sample ERISA order, the plan administrator or fiduciary must file and serve the administrative record within 60 days of the order.
“The employee benefit plan administrator or fiduciary must file the administrative record in the case with the court, with a copy served upon opposing counsel, within 60 days of this order.”
Trial
Under the sample bench trial order, email proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in Word format to chambers, copying opposing counsel, at least seven days before trial.
“Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law must be filed electronically through CM/ECF at least seven days before trial. The parties should also email the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in Word format, with citations, to [email protected], copying opposing counsel.”
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 Dillon decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In deciding whether to allow a late amendment that drops a federal claim and effectively defeats removal, the court gave weight to how far the case had actually progressed, no scheduling order, no discovery, no prior substantive ruling, rather than treating the timing or motive behind the amendment as disqualifying on its own.
“The court has not issued any scheduling orders or previous substantive rulings; discovery has not started; and no trial date has been set.”
Procedural preferences
In Caldwell v. United Parcel Service, Dillon denied a second motion to amend because the proposed pleading made the claims harder to discern and failed to cure defects she had already identified.
“Unfortunately, it has become increasingly more difficult for the court to discern Caldwell's claims with each iteration of his complaint.”
In McFarland's civil-rights case, Dillon set aside an entry of default after considering the defendant's prompt action, possible defense, and lack of demonstrated prejudice under the Fourth Circuit's preference for decisions on the merits.
“The Fourth Circuit has ‘repeatedly expressed a strong preference that, as a general matter, defaults be avoided and that claims and defenses be disposed of on their merits.’”
Cautions
In a FOIA case the court draws a firm line between the agency's obligation to search for and produce responsive records and a requester's obligation to actually appeal an adverse response through the agency's own process before suing; failure to exhaust defeats jurisdiction even when the agency's search was reasonable.
“the court will dismiss Crandell's claims as to EDA's responses to PRO 18-12 and PRO 19-06 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction given his failure to exhaust administrative remedies.”
In Bates’s FTCA suit, Dillon found that a claim based on an allegedly fraudulent EPA report fell within the statute’s misrepresentation exception and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction without prejudice.
“falls squarely within the misrepresentation exception.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, the court will deny Caldwell's motion and dismiss the case with prejudice.”
“Therefore, the court will grant the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend complaint, order the proposed amended complaint filed, and remand the case to state court.”
“the court dismisses the defendants' motions to dismiss as moot.”
“The court will grant UVA's motion to the extent it seeks dismissal of plaintiff's claims under the ADA and for punitive damages. The court will deny UVA's motion in all other respects and will issue an appropriate order.”
“the court will (1) grant the Government's motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice as to Crandell's FOIA claims regarding EDA's responses to PRO 18-12 and PRO 19-06 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction”
“grant the Government's motion for summary judgment as to Crandell's FOIA claims regarding EDA's responses to PRO 21-34 and 22-11”
“deny Crandell's motion for partial summary judgment”
“For the foregoing reasons, each of Lim's claims fails to state a plausible claim for relief and his claims must therefore be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).”
“The court will therefore deny Lim's motion to reconsider.”
“Those defendants were never served and were therefore dismissed from this action pursuant to Rule 4(m). Accordingly, Lim's motion is denied.”
“MVP's Motion to Exclude Testimony by Paul A. Rubin (Dkt. No. 10) is GRANTED;”
“MVP's Motion to Exclude Testimony by L. Steven Noble (Dkt. No. 12) is GRANTED;”
“MVP's Motion to Exclude Testimony of Donna Jones regarding value (Dkt. No. 14) is DISMISSED AS MOOT;”
“MVP's Motion to Exclude Testimony of Amy E. Hudson (Dkt. No. 15) is GRANTED;”
“MVP's Motion in Limine (Dkt. No. 16) is GRANTED with respect to pipeline danger/safety issues. In all other respects, this motion is DISMISSED AS MOOT; and”
“Landowners' Motion to Exclude Testimony by Schweitzer (Dkt. No. 17) is DENIED.”
“The court will grant MVP's summary judgment motion and vest title to the easement on MVP Parcel No. VA-RO-5748 in a separate order.”
“Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Hamms' motions to amend/correct their initial disclosures and answers to interrogatories (Dkt. No. 16), to stay (Dkt. No. 22), and to continue (Dkt. No. 24) are DENIED.”
“Accordingly, the court will grant Anderson's motion to suppress the evidence obtained pursuant to that search warrant.”
“Thus, the court will grant respondent's motion and dismiss the petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.”
“the City's motion to dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part”
“the individual defendants' motion to dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part”
“There being no genuine issue of material fact, the court will grant Hyde's motion for summary judgment and dismiss, with prejudice, the Fourth Amendment claim regarding Lescs's detention and transportation for a psychological evaluation by defendant Hyde.”
“Because plaintiff has stated a plausible claim under Title IX, the court will deny JMU's motion to dismiss.”
“For all of these reasons, the court will grant in part and deny in part defendant's motion for summary judgment.”
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 | 8 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 1 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 7 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 8 | 7 |
| Sep 2025 | 8 | 93 |
| Mar 2025 | 17 | 24 |
| Sep 2024 | 15 | 9 |
| Mar 2024 | 12 | 8 |
| Sep 2023 | 9 | 9 |
| Mar 2023 | 26 | 13 |
| Sep 2022 | 13 | 10 |
| Mar 2022 | 11 | 11 |
| Sep 2021 | 8 | 8 |
| Mar 2021 | 10 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 39 | 0 |
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 Western District of Virginia, not for Judge Dillon: 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 | 517 | 9.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 48 | 6.9 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 447 | 9.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 14 | 13.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 517 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 535 | 9.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 511 | 11 months |
| Sep 2022 | 610 | 14.1 months |
| Sep 2021 | 655 | 11.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 588 | 10.9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 618 | 11.3 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 Dillon with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Dillon, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Dillon's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace