Thomas John Curran
How Judge Curran decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Curran declined summary judgment when the movant relied on disability determinations that did not resolve whether the plaintiff could perform the job at issue.
“This court cannot grant summary judgment as a matter of law on this basis because six months before the Defendant submitted his brief the Seventh Circuit indicated that a finding of disability by the Social Security Administration should not be given preclusive effect in a Rehabilitation Act case.”
Curran required an unequivocal waiver before allowing claims against a tribal government.
“It is well-settled that a waiver of sovereign immunity cannot be implied, but must be unequivocally expressed.”
Procedural preferences
Curran expected summary-judgment opponents to answer the movant's evidence with record support.
“If the movant’s evidence tends to show that the opposing party’s claim is baseless, then the opposing party must adduce countervailing evidence or he must raise a substantial question as to the veracity of completeness of the movant’s showing.”
Cautions
Curran criticized careless factual submissions that made basic procedural facts difficult to determine.
“The parties’ negligent presentation of this and other basic material facts of this matter has seriously undermined the court's attempt to resolve the legal issues presented.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For these reasons the court ORDERS that the ‘Defendant’s Motion for Dismissal or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment’ (filed April 14, 1993) IS DENIED.”
“Because no material facts are in dispute and the Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the court ORDERS that the ‘Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment’ (filed October 15, 1997) IS GRANTED.”
“For the reasons explained above, the court ORDERS that the ‘Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment’ (filed October 4, 1996) IS GRANTED as to all civil rights claims for money damages brought against the named Defendants in their personal capacities.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ ‘Motion to Continue Trial Date’ (filed May 15, 1997) IS DENIED because it is moot.”
“The court accordingly finds that the relator must comply with the DOT regulations concerning legal proceedings between private litigants. IT IS ORDERED that the government’s motion to quash the subpoena and for a protective order be and hereby ARE GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Eugene Chaney, Jr. to vacate and correct an illegal conviction be and hereby IS DENIED.”
“For the reasons explained above, the court ORDERS that the ‘Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment’ (filed August 15, 1995) IS GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the ‘Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment’ (filed September 15, 1995) IS DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the ‘Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment and Cross Motion for Summary Judgment’ (filed September 15,1995) IS DENIED.”
“For the reasons explained above, the court ORDERS that the United States of America’s ‘Motion to Substitute the United States of America as the Named Defendant’ (filed August 26, 1996) IS GRANTED. The United States of America is substituted as the Defendant in the place of Brian Stevenson and American Family Mutual Insurance Company.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant’s ‘Motion to Amend Caption’ (filed August 26,1996) IS GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the ‘United States of America’s Motion to Dismiss’ (filed March 8, 1996 and renewed) IS GRANTED. This action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.”
“Having reviewed the moving papers of the defendant Harley-Davidson, Inc., the court ORDERS that the defendant’s ‘Motion to Strike Demand for Compensatory and Punitive Damages and for Jury Trial’ (filed February 26, 1992) IS GRANTED in keeping with this court’s previous decision that the damages provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 do not apply retroactively.”
“For these reasons, the court ORDERS that ‘Carver Boat Corporation and Gen-mar Holdings, Inc. Motion for Partial Summary Judgment’ (filed February 25, 2000) IS GRANTED. Partial summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants Carver Boat Corporation and Gen-mar Holdings, Inc. on Plaintiff Shandwick Holdings, Ltd.’s claims of negligence and intentional misrepresentation and on its request for punitive damages.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Shandwick Holdings, Ltd.’s ‘Motion for Partial Summary Judgment’ (filed March 1, 2000) IS DENIED without prejudice.”
“For the reasons explained above, the court ORDERS that Dennis J. Van Stra-ten’s ‘Petition Under § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody’ (filed June 1, 1998) IS DENIED upon its merits.”
“Accordingly, the court ORDERS that the ‘Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss’ (filed July 14,1998) IS GRANTED IN PART, as explained above.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the ‘Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions’ (filed August 7, 1998) IS DENIED. The Plaintiffs’ Complaint is not wholly legally frivolous within the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.”
“For these reasons, the court ORDERS that Henry Martin’s ‘Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody’ (filed January 10, 2001) IS DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Martin’s ‘Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255’ (filed April 20, 2001) IS DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The tenure-bounded docket index returned twenty assigned cases, all terminated. The coded subset included antitrust, civil-rights, trademark, tax, Social Security, prisoner, statutory, and government-recovery matters. No sampled timeline supported a motion-timing summary.
Put Judge Curran's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Curran actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Curran's own signed orders and cites them.