John Thomas Copenhaver Jr.
Judge Copenhaver no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Copenhaver decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a state-habeas case where the respondent's first motion to dismiss was denied without prejudice to let the petitioner amend, the judge held the government to its renewed burden on the amended petition rather than treating the earlier denial as settling the matter, and granted dismissal only after that fresh round of briefing.
“adopting the 24 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn; granting Petitioner's 22 MOTION to Amend 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) ... denying without prejudice Respondent's 10 MOTION to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment; referring this matter to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.”
On a coverage dispute, the judge resolved the cross-motions for summary judgment by reading both the homeowners and auto policies against the specific facts alleged, rather than deciding the duty to defend on the pleadings alone, and found no coverage under either policy.
“granting 17 CROSS MOTION by Nationwide General Insurance Company, Nationwide Insurance Company of America for Summary Judgment against Belcher and S.R.; and denying 15 MOTION by Teddy D. Belcher, Jr. for Summary Judgment; finding that Nationwide has no duty to defend or indemnify Belcher under either the Homeowners Policy or the Auto Policy, as set forth more fully herein.”
Procedural preferences
On a fraudulent-joinder or diversity-defeating-party argument raised to keep a removed case in federal court, the judge resolves close or disputed factual questions in favor of remand rather than adjudicating the merits at the jurisdictional stage.
“the court is constrained to conclude that Standard Insurance has failed to satisfy its “heavy burden” in proving fraudulent joinder ... it is not immediately apparent whether the State’s liability insurance coverage precludes them as well. To permit extensive inquiry on that issue at this stage of the litigation would thwart the purpose of the jurisdictional rules.”
On removal, the judge is willing to split a case rather than remand or retain it wholesale, sending only the count that lacks a basis for federal jurisdiction back to state court while keeping the rest -- and denies a fee award to a plaintiff who only partially prevails on remand.
“granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's 5 MOTION to Remand; directing that Count IV of plaintiff's complaint is remanded to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County; this Court will maintain jurisdiction over Counts I, II, and III; denying plaintiff's request for attorney's fees and costs in view of this disposition.”
A defendant who appears promptly through counsel and moves to set aside a clerk's default, rather than ignoring it, will have the default set aside so the case proceeds on the merits.
“granting Cruzin's 32 Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default; the Clerk's 29 Entry of Default is set aside”
The judge consistently adopts a magistrate judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation in Social Security appeals and habeas cases when no persuasive objection is raised, whether the recommendation favors the claimant or the government.
“adopting the 9 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; granting Plaintiff's 6 Request for Remand; denying Commissioner's 7 Request for Judgment on the Pleadings; the decision of the Commissioner is reversed and remanded”
Cautions
A late disclosure of new fact witnesses will not be excluded where the scheduling order's deadline for such disclosures is genuinely ambiguous and the disclosure still comes well before the close of discovery -- the moving party bears the burden of showing prejudice, not merely lateness.
“in light of the potential ambiguity, the court declines to find the March 15, 2011, disclosure untimely. It came nearly two months in advance of the close of discovery, without a clear deadline having been previously established for Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures.”
A pro se litigant's claims that amount to a collateral attack on a prior state-court judgment will be dismissed under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and the court will also address the merits in the alternative rather than resting on the jurisdictional ground alone.
“the 7 MOTION by Bobby R. Hale to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint be GRANTED; and this civil action be DISMISSED, either without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Rooker-Feldman and Federal Rule 12(h), or alternatively, with prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii) and Federal Rule 12(b)(6).”
A habeas petitioner seeking to hold a case in abeyance to exhaust additional claims will not get that relief once the court has already found the underlying petition meritless; the stay requests were denied in the same order that dismissed the petition on the merits.
“the 18 MOTION by Jordan J. Goard for Stay and Abeyance and 23 MOTION by Jordan J. Goard for Stay and Abeyance re: 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) are DENIED”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's 5 MOTION to Remand; directing that Count IV of plaintiff's complaint is remanded to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County; this Court will maintain jurisdiction over Counts I, II, and III; denying plaintiff's request for attorney's fees and costs in view of this disposition.”
“directing that the plaintiff's 9 MOTION to Remand Case to Circuit Court of Kanawha County is granted; the plaintiff's 18 Amended Complaint is remanded to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia.”
“granting Plaintiff's 6 Request for Remand; denying Commissioner's 7 Request for Judgment on the Pleadings; the decision of the Commissioner is reversed and remanded and this case is dismissed from the docket of this Court.”
“the 14 MOTION by Donnie Ames to Dismiss 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and for Summary Judgment is GRANTED”
“the 18 MOTION by Jordan J. Goard for Stay and Abeyance and 23 MOTION by Jordan J. Goard for Stay and Abeyance re: 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) are DENIED”
“granting 17 CROSS MOTION by Nationwide General Insurance Company, Nationwide Insurance Company of America for Summary Judgment against Belcher and S.R. ... finding that Nationwide has no duty to defend or indemnify Belcher under either the Homeowners Policy or the Auto Policy”
“denying 15 MOTION by Teddy D. Belcher, Jr. for Summary Judgment”
“adopting the 14 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; denying Plaintiff's 1 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs; denying Plaintiff's 5 Motion for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order; granting Defendant's 7 Motion to Dismiss and this action is dismissed.”
“directing that the 5 Request to Reverse the Commissioner's decision be denied; the 8 Request to Affirm be granted and this case be dismissed from the docket of this Court.”
“granting Cruzin's 32 Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default; the Clerk's 29 Entry of Default is set aside”
“adopting the 6 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; denying the Petitioner's 1 Habeas Petition and dismisses without prejudice this action from the docket.”
“Plaintiff's 9 Request to Reverse the decision is denied; Defendant's 10 Request to Affirm the decision is granted; the final decision of the Commissioner is affirmed and this matter is dismissed and stricken from the docket.”
“MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 5 MOTION to Remand to Circuit Court as more fully set forth herein.”
“granting in part and denying in part without prejudice Defendant's 26 MOTION to Strike Plaintiffs' Expert Witnesses, as set forth herein.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled caseload includes diversity personal-injury and product-liability suits removed from state court, employment and insurance-coverage disputes, Social Security disability appeals, federal criminal prosecutions proceeding largely by guilty plea, and a substantial volume of federal detainee (28 U.S.C. Section 2241) and state-prisoner (28 U.S.C. Section 2254 and Section 2255) habeas and post-conviction matters. Motions to remand recur often in the removed diversity and employment cases, reflecting a docket drawn heavily from Kanawha County state-court filings.
A historical record
Judge Copenhaver 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.