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

Frank Joseph Polozola

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana district Retired 2013 · served 1980–2013 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 26 signed orders read

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

How Judge Polozola decides

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

What persuades

In employment cases the court grants summary judgment where the plaintiff offers no comparator, no evidence of an adverse action, or fails to exhaust before the agency — requiring competent record evidence on each element rather than allegation.

“FedEx’s motion for summary judgment should be granted on all Title VII claims brought by plaintiff”

The court reads insurance and indemnity contracts by their plain terms, giving an unlimited vendor indemnity its full breadth and treating the duty to defend as broader than ultimate liability.

“IT IS ORDERED that Target’s motion for summary judgment be granted.”

Procedural preferences

On removal, the court polices its own jurisdiction closely and remands where the federal hook is absent — here holding a third-party plaintiff who chose the state forum could not remove its own indemnity claim.

“IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ motion to remand be and it is hereby GRANTED.”

The court enforces discovery and admission rules strictly: unanswered requests for admission are deemed admitted and can, unopposed, carry a moving party's summary judgment.

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for summary judgment shall be granted.”

Signed rulings

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

United States ex rel. Manuel v. Livingston Management, Inc.
· 2012-05-10
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Court finds that defendant’s motion should be denied.”

Blanchard v. Newton
· 2012-06-07
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“plaintiffs claims are dismissed with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

K-Tek Corp. v. Lovett
· 1996-02-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the motion is granted to the extent the plaintiff has filed a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 256. In all other respects, the motion is denied.”

Scott v. Performance Contractors, Inc.
· 1996-01-25
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that the defendants’' motions to dismiss be and are hereby GRANTED.”

Cliburn v. Police Jury Ass'n of Louisiana, Inc.
· 1997-10-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction be and it is hereby granted.”

Palmer v. Ford Motor Co.
· 1997-10-30
Motion for reconsideration (defendant) Denied

“defendant’s motion for reconsideration of order granting dismissal should be denied, subject to the following conditions”

Hammond v. Jacobs Field Services
· 2012-02-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary judgment shall be granted on all of plaintiffs federal claims based on disability discrimination, race discrimination, and retaliation. These claims shall be dismissed with prejudice.”

Kerr v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
· 2012-03-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that State Farm’s motion for summary judgment shall be granted and plaintiffs claims shall be dismissed with prejudice.”

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Target Corp.
· 2011-03-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that Target’s motion for summary judgment be granted.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Inliten and Hartford’s motion for summary judgment be denied.”

Goudeau v. East Baton Rouge Parish School Board
· 2012-07-31
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.”

Osborne v. Elmer
· 2004-08-05
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that both of defendants’ motions for summary judgment are GRANTED.”

Louis v. East Baton Rouge Parish School Board
· 2003-12-19
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“the motion is denied because the Court finds there are material issues of fact which preclude the Court from granting summary judgment at this time.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 92 days (N = 7).

The retrievable senior-status docket is dominated by miscellaneous federal collection and enforcement proceedings (SBA and government-debt matters), with a small number of civil cases spanning personal-injury/products liability, motor-vehicle injury, prisoner civil rights, and interstate-commerce claims. His active-era docket, reflected in the published opinions, ran to employment, insurance-coverage, removal/remand, and general civil litigation.

A historical record

Judge Polozola 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.