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

Duross Fitzpatrick

United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia district Retired 2008 · served 1985–2008 Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 25 signed orders read

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

How Judge Fitzpatrick decides

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

What persuades

Fitzpatrick accepted an ERISA administrator’s interpretation after finding the plan term supported that reading and the result was reasonable.

“Because the Court agrees with Defendant’s interpretation of Guaranteed Issue Amount, the Court cannot find Defendant’s interpretation unreasonable.”

He treated a claim as viable at the pleading stage when the alleged facts supported any possible legal theory, even if the complaint used a different theory.

“If the facts alleged in the complaint would allow the plaintiff to recover under any possible theory, the motion must be denied, regardless of whether they would allow recovery under the particular theory pleaded by the plaintiff.”

Procedural preferences

Fitzpatrick conditionally withdrew a bankruptcy reference only because withdrawal was necessary before the multidistrict panel could consider transfer.

“Defendants are unable to seek a transfer from the Panel unless the reference is withdrawn from the bankruptcy court.”

He required removing defendants to substantiate the jurisdictional amount rather than rely on a complaint’s general description of serious injury.

“If the mere allegation that the plaintiff was ‘seriously injured’ sufficed to establish the jurisdictional amount, then virtually every personal injury case could be removed to federal court.”

Cautions

Fitzpatrick invalidated an inventory search when the governing policy failed to protect against investigative discretion.

“the Macon Police Guidelines were not sufficient to protect the Fourth Amendment Rights of Defendant and that the inventory search was the result of an impermissible investigatory motive.”

He denied class treatment where separately filed cases showed that potential members wanted to control their own litigation.

“The right and desire of other potential plaintiffs to control their own litigation and pursue independent actions are important considerations which defeat the propriety of class certification.”

Signed rulings

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

Dent v. American International Life Assurance Co.
· 2005-05-16
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Planned Furniture Promotions, Inc. v. Benjamin S. Youngblood, Inc.
· 2005-04-25
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Planned Furniture Promotions, Inc. is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Summary judgment (federal government) Denied

“The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the IRS is hereby DENIED.”

International Brominated Solvents Ass'n v. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Inc.
· 2005-03-11
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’ motions”

Planned Furniture Promotions, Inc. v. Benjamin S. Youngblood, Inc.
· 2004-08-16
Summary judgment (Georgia Department of Revenue) Denied

“Defendant Georgia Department of Revenue’s Motion for Summary Judgement is DENIED.”

Holmes v. Grubman
· 2004-04-29
Motion to withdraw reference (defendants) Granted

“Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Withdraw the Reference is GRANTED CONDITIONALLY, that is on the condition that Defendants move and receive from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation an order of transfer.”

Educational Credit Management Corp. v. Carter
· 2002-05-16
Bankruptcy appeal (appellant creditor) Granted

“Accordingly, the decision is hereby REVERSED.”

McCall Ex Rel. Odom v. Department of Human Resources
· 2001-11-29
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted in part

“Accordingly, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Bray v. National Services Industries, Inc.
· 2001-10-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is hereby GRANTED. Additionally, because she has not met this threshold requirement, Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is hereby DENIED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Hendrickson v. Georgia Power Co.
· 2000-02-02
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby DENIED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Macon Iron & Paper Stock Co. v. Transcontinental Insurance
· 1999-03-10
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby GRANTED and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby DENIED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Belch v. Board of Regents of the University System
· 1998-11-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment immunity is DENIED.”

Bryant v. Apple South, Inc.
· 1998-07-29
Motions to strike (plaintiffs) Granted in part

“Plaintiffs’ motion to strike is hereby GRANTED as to Exhibits K, L, M, N, O, Q, R, and P and DENIED as to Exhibit S, and Defendants’ motion to dismiss the above-styled action is hereby DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

A historical record

Judge Fitzpatrick 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.