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

Eric Christian Tostrud

United States District Court for the District of Minnesota Appointed by Donald Trump (Republican) 28 signed orders read

How Judge Tostrud decides

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

What persuades

Tostrud applies Noerr-Pennington rigorously in sham-litigation antitrust claims: a plaintiff must plausibly allege that the defendant's prior lawsuit was 'objectively baseless,' and a complaint that does not clear that bar is dismissed with prejudice. Counsel pleading a sham-litigation theory before him should plead specific facts showing objective baselessness, not merely bad motive.

“Olson has failed to allege facts in his Amended Complaint plausibly showing that the state-court case is objectively baseless.”

Tostrud will not grant summary judgment on a thin pre-discovery record where genuine fact questions remain, even when the movant presses a clean legal theory; he prefers to deny without prejudice and invite a renewed motion once the record is developed. A defendant moving early for summary judgment in his court risks a denial that is explicitly 'not the final word.'

“At least on this record, the better answer is that Allstate owed the estate a duty of good faith, and fact questions preclude a dispositive ruling that Allstate did not breach that duty.”

Tostrud declines to dismiss requests for injunctive relief at the pleading stage where the plaintiff has alleged plausible underlying claims, treating the availability of a remedy as a question better resolved later. A 12(b)(6) movant trying to strike a remedy prayer (rather than attacking the claim) should expect that argument to fail.

“courts on balance seem reticent to dismiss requests for injunctive relief at the pleading stage”

Signed rulings

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

Oxygenator Water Technologies, Inc. v. Tennant Company
0:20-cv-00358-ECT · 2020-08-07
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Defendant Tennant Company's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 12] is DENIED.”

Olson v. PowerBlock, Inc.
0:21-cv-02713-ECT · 2022-05-23
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“PowerBlock's motion to dismiss [ECF No. 29] is GRANTED IN PART. Olson's claim for sham litigation monopolization and attempted monopolization in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2 (Count I) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Olson's claim for tortious interference with business advantage (Count II) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Motions to stay (defendant) Moot / procedural

“PowerBlock's alternative motion to stay is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Olson's motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No. 35] is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“PowerBlock's motion to dismiss [ECF No. 14] is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Petersen v. Allstate Mutual Insurance Company
0:22-cv-00976-ECT-DJF · 2022-11-14
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendant Allstate Indemnity Company's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 11] is DENIED.”

Walton v. Blue Earth County
0:20-cv-00165-ECT-KMM · 2021-04-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 35] is GRANTED. ... The Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

White v. Vanderbeek
0:18-cv-03424-ECT-DTS · 2020-06-02
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 31] is GRANTED; ... Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Rollo-Carlson v. United States of America
0:18-cv-02842-ECT · 2019-03-18
Motions to dismiss (government) Granted

“The Government's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 7] is GRANTED.”

Joseph v. Wal-Mart Corporation
0:20-cv-01255-ECT · 2020-10-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 12] is GRANTED.”

Reese v. Sherburne County Detention Center
0:19-cv-01975-ECT · 2021-10-20
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The MEnD Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 98] is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The Sherburne County Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 107] is GRANTED.”

Trent M. v. Kijakazi
0:20-cv-01738-ECT · 2022-02-11
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 27] is DENIED;”

Summary judgment (government) Granted

“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 36] is GRANTED;”

Morton v. Park Christian School, Inc.
0:19-cv-03134-ECT · 2022-10-03
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Timothy Kerr's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 151] is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant Park Christian School, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 157] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff Jimmy Morton's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 173] is DENIED.”

Daubert motion (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' Joint Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony of Dr. Arndt [ECF No. 127] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as explained in Part III.B., above.”

Nicholas L. L. v. Barr
0:19-cv-02543-ECT · 2019-10-07
Preliminary injunction (petitioner) Denied

“Petitioner Nicholas L.L.'s Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 2] is DENIED.”

Stursberg v. Morrison Sund PLLC
0:22-cv-00841-ECT · 2023-01-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Morrison Sund PLLC's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 24] is GRANTED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 354 days (N = 2).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 81 days (N = 1).

The 30-docket sample is weighted toward recent matters and is not exhaustive. May and June 2026 filings are dominated by alien-detainee habeas petitions, including Tovar-Cardozo v. Blanche, Wattara v. Brott, Flores Monrroy v. Blanche, Picazo Jimenez v. Blanche, Ortiz Diaz v. Stasko, and Rodriguez-Sigala v. Warden FCI Sandstone. The sample also includes civil-rights, personal-property, product-liability, insurance, and criminal matters. Older terminated civil cases represented in the outcome sample include Olson v. PowerBlock, an antitrust case, and Petersen v. Allstate, an insurance case. The sample does not establish the full nature-of-suit mix or comprehensive dispositive-motion timing.

Put Judge Tostrud's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Tostrud actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Tostrud's own signed orders and cites them.