🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Elsijane Trimble Roy

United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas district Retired 2007 · served 1977–2007 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 20 signed orders read

Judge Roy no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Roy decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

She treated a contract’s annual funding-out clause as limiting the county’s enforceable obligation to one budget year when testing the agreement against a constitutional revenue limit.

“Because the County is only ‘on the hook’ for one year at a time, the Court finds that the proper dollar figure to use when making the ‘obligation vs. revenue’ comparison is the annual fee under the contract, $93,316.08.”

Once an employer produced a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason, she required evidence that would permit a jury to find the stated reason was pretextual.

“Because defendant has offered evidence of legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for firing the plaintiff, a defense under the Act, plaintiff had to put before the Court evidence which would permit a jury to find that the real reason she was fired was on account of her race.”

Procedural preferences

She declined to grant summary judgment on an issue the movant had not actually pursued, emphasizing fairness to the responding party.

“Second, it seems contrary to the spirit of the ADA for the Court to bar the plaintiffs claim by summary judgment because the Court seized on an issue both her counsel and opposing counsel did not.”

She enforced scheduling deadlines where a late defense would require reopening discovery and disadvantage the opposing party.

“Of course, this is why the Court has deadlines and spells them out to the litigants well in advance.”

Cautions

She declined requests that would require an advisory ruling on contingent competing claims before an actual controversy had matured.

“The parties are simply seeking an advisory opinion regarding priority of claims to a possible pot of gold at the end of a litigation rainbow that is now ten years old and counting, with no pot yet in sight.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

AgriBank, FCB v. Cupples
· 1993-03-18
Cross motions for summary judgment (AgriBank and United Agri Products Financial Services) Granted in part

“The pending motions for summary judgment are therefore granted in part and denied in part.”

Kane v. United States
· 1993-04-13
Motion to dismiss or for summary judgment (United States) Granted in part

“In summary, pursuant to this Court’s previous Order, the VA’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claim under the FTCA has been granted. The VA’s motion to dismiss the CERCLA claim is also granted. Plaintiffs’ claims for breach of warranty and an unconstitutional ‘taking’ are transferred to the United States Claims Court per 28 U.S.C. § 1631.”

Davis v. Tamburo
· 1993-05-06
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“Now before the Court is the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set out below, said motion will be granted.”

Ellis v. Kitsmiller
· 1993-11-05
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“It follows that the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction should be, and hereby is, granted.”

Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs alternative request to remand this matter to state court rather than suffer dismissal is denied.”

McDougal v. Odom
· 1994-05-02
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Upon all of the foregoing, the Court finds that defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be, and it is hereby, granted.”

Federated Rural Electric Insurance v. Arkansas Electric Cooperatives, Inc.
· 1994-05-19
Motion to dismiss or stay (Arkansas Electric Cooperatives, Inc.) Granted in part

“Thus, AECI’s motion to stay (DOC # 5) is granted in part.”

Hall v. Modern Woodmen of America
· 1994-12-02
Summary judgment (Modern Woodmen of America) Granted in part

“Accordingly, the Court grants partial summary judgment to the defendant on the issue of punitive damages.”

Government Service Automation, Inc. v. Faulkner County
· 1995-02-21
Motion for partial summary judgment (Faulkner County) Denied

“Accordingly, the County’s motion for partial summary judgment on constitutional grounds is denied at this time.”

Consolidated Sawmill MacHinery International, Inc. v. Hi-Tech Engineering, Inc.
· 1995-03-08
Motion to amend judgment (Hi-Tech Engineering, Inc.) Granted

“Accordingly, the Motion to Amend Judgment and the Motion for Costs and Fees are hereby granted.”

Motion for costs and attorney fees (Hi-Tech Engineering, Inc.) Granted
Potty Pals, Inc. v. Carson Financial Group, Inc.
· 1995-04-28
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“Accordingly, the case was not removed in a timely manner per § 1446 and must be, and hereby is, remanded to the Chancery Court of Pulaski County.”

Porter v. City of Little Rock
· 1995-08-29
Summary judgment (City of Little Rock) Granted

“For the reasons set out below, defendant City of Little Rock’s pending motion for summary judgment is granted.”

Brown v. United States
· 1995-09-08
Motions to dismiss (United States) Granted

“Therefore, this matter must be, and hereby is, dismissed with prejudice.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The reviewed decisions span civil rights, employment, insurance coverage, contracts, environmental liability, federal tort claims, removal, jurisdiction, and post-judgment fees. This publication-selected sample cannot support a career-wide caseload estimate.

A historical record

Judge Roy 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.