R. David Proctor
How Judge Proctor decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On summary judgment he parses each count and each defendant separately, preserving genuinely triable claims (Title VII retaliation; individual Section 1981 harassment) even while granting on adjacent counts.
“UAB's Motion is due to be denied as to Count Two. Plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim which must be resolved by a trier of fact.”
Enforces mandatory ('shall') forum-selection clauses through forum non conveniens, and will not let a plaintiff enforce a contract while escaping its forum clause.
“it was irreconcilable for Plaintiff to simultaneously attempt to enforce the contracts against Defendants but avoid the form-selection clauses those contracts impose.”
Procedural preferences
Erie restraint: certifies truly debatable, determinative, unresolved questions of state law to the state's highest court rather than guessing.
“The judicially modest approach by a federal court is to defer to state courts about the interpretation of state statutes.”
Cautions
Very low tolerance for shotgun pleadings: he strikes deficient complaints with explicit curing instructions, but after repeated noncompliance he dismisses WITH PREJUDICE and denies further leave.
“Plaintiff has demonstrated either an unwillingness or an inability to remedy these pleading defects, and the interests of judicial economy and fairness to Defendant warrant no further leave to amend.”
Rule 59(e) reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy used sparingly — not a second bite or a substitute for appeal.
“A Rule 59(e) motion cannot be used to relitigate old matters, raise argument or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of judgment.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For these reasons, Defendant's Motion (Doc. # 80) is GRANTED and this court respectfully asks the Supreme Court of Alabama to answer the question certified.”
“For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff's Motion to Alter or Amend (Doc. # 44) is DENIED.”
“UAB's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 84) is due to be granted as to Counts One, Three, and Four, and on the issue of backpay. However, UAB's Motion is due to be denied as to Count Two. Plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim which must be resolved by a trier of fact.”
“Mayer's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 86) is due to be granted as to Count Five. Mayer is due to be dismissed from this case.”
“Cagle's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 85) is due to be denied as to Count Six.”
“Defendants' Motion is due to be granted in part and denied in part.”
“ADOC's Motion for Summary Judgment is due to be granted.”
“Defendant Imerys Carbonates USA, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 31) is due to be granted.”
“Defendants' Motions (Defamation, Doc. # 1243; RICO, Docs. # 754, 755) are due to be denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 249 days (N = 7).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 38.5 days (N = 4).
The reviewed cases illustrate Judge Proctor's case mix but do not represent his full docket. Broader case-ending data are unavailable for the later part of the period.
Put Judge Proctor's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Proctor actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Proctor's own signed orders and cites them.