Roger L. Hunt
Judge Hunt no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Hunt decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Hunt preserved a federal mortgage-disclosure damages theory while rejecting rescission for a residential mortgage transaction.
“Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ TILA claim are DENIED as to Plaintiffs’ request for monetary damages and GRANTED as to Plaintiffs’ request for rescission.”
He allowed insurance bad-faith and unfair-practices theories to proceed even after resolving the contract claim.
“The Court disagrees with TIG’s assertion a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing fails in the absence of insurance coverage.”
He denied judgment where evidence left genuine disputes about defendants' knowledge of alleged mistreatment and their response.
“The Court therefore finds that genuine issues of material fact remain as to whether Maple Star and Erbes had a duty to Baby Boy Charles at the time of his death.”
Procedural preferences
Hunt treated disclosure of interested parties as a serious court-integrity obligation and ordered a sanctions response after a material omission.
“the Court believes that Righthaven has made multiple inaccurate and likely dishonest statements to the Court.”
He enforced local briefing rules when deficient submissions consumed substantial judicial time and risked misunderstanding the claims.
“they have unnecessarily cost the Court considerable time deciphering counsel’s arguments, risking both a misunderstanding of Plaintiffs’ assertions as well as possible injustice to Plaintiffs.”
He denied intervention when the existing government party adequately represented the proposed intervenors and their addition would burden the case.
“adding them as parties would unnecessarily encumber the litigation.”
Cautions
Hunt rejected punitive damages where the plaintiff supplied no evidence of implied malice or comparable culpable intent.
“Villagomes has failed to present any evidence that LabCorp acted with implied malice or any level of culpable intent as she claims.”
He denied preliminary relief when the movant failed every core equitable factor.
“Plaintiff has not shown (1) it will suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted; (2) that it is likely to succeed on the merits; (3) that the balance of equities (or hardship) tips in its favor; and, in this instance, (4) that granting Plaintiff an injunction is in the public interest”
He denied intervention despite timeliness and a protectable interest because adequate representation was not rebutted.
“the Proposed Intervenors have failed to overcome the presumption that the Secretary adequately represents their interests”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Set Schedule of Payments Re: Restitution (# 142) is DENIED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Foley’s Findings & Recommendation (#36, entered February 7, 2008) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED, and Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence (# 25) is denied.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Homeview Lending and Select Portfolio Servicing’s Motions to Dismiss (# 8, # 9) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (# 12) is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs claim for breach of contract and request for declaratory relief and DENIED as to Plaintiffs claim for unfair claim practices and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.”
“IT IS ALSO ORDERED that Plaintiffs Countermotion for Summary Judgment (# 15) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Righthaven’s Motion for Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice (# 36) is DENIED as moot.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Stephens Media’s Motion to Dismiss or Strike (# 38) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Democratic Underground’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 45) is DENIED as moot.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Lab-Corp’s Motion for Summary Judgment (#108) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Surgieare’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 109) is GRANTED as to all claims.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Accurate’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 109) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Maple Star Nevada and Jennifer Erbes’ Motion for Summary Judgment (# 159) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant County of Clark’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 167) is DENIED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Dr. J’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 28) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Leavitt’s Report and Recommendation (# 321, entered May 29, 2007) is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED, and Defendant’s Motion to Suppress (# 168) is denied.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion in Limine (# 105) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Record (# 106) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion in Limine (# 107) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Sixth and Seventh Claims for Relief (#108) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion in Limine (# 109) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Fourth Claim for Relief (# 110) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Eighth Claim for Relief (# 111) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs’ Entitlement to Compensatory Damages under Plaintiffs’ Second and Third Claims for Relief (# 112) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fifth Claims for relief (# 113) is DENIED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Proposed Intervenors’ Motion to Intervene (# 89) is DENIED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff World Market Center Venture’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (# 3) is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The 19 reviewed decisions cover varied litigation but do not establish the distribution of Hunt's full caseload.
A historical record
Judge Hunt 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.