United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

Eastern District of Louisiana
Fifth Circuit
Judgeships
Posts: 12
Judges: 9
Vacancies: 3
Judges
Chief: Nannette Jolivette-Brown
Active judges: Barry W. Ashe, Nannette Jolivette Brown, Greg Guidry, Brandon Long, Susie Morgan, Darrel Papillion, Jane Triche-Milazzo, Wendy Vitter, Jay Zainey Senior judges: Lance Africk, Carl Barbier, Eldon Fallon, Ivan Lemelle, Mary Ann Lemmon, Sarah Vance

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana is a federal trial court based in New Orleans. It is one of 94 United States district courts. When decisions of the court are appealed, they are appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, based in New Orleans, at the John Minor Wisdom Federal Courthouse.

Vacancies

See also: Current federal judicial vacancies

There are three current vacancies on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, out of the court's 12 judicial positions.

Pending nominations

There are no pending nominees for this court.

Active judges

Article III judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Jay Zainey	George W. Bush (R)	February 14, 2002 -	University of New Orleans, 1972	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1975
Nannette Jolivette Brown	Barack Obama (D)	October 4, 2011 -	University of Southwestern Louisiana, 1985	Tulane Law School, 1988
Jane Triche-Milazzo	Barack Obama (D)	October 12, 2011 -	Nicholls State University, 1977	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1992
Susie Morgan	Barack Obama (D)	March 30, 2012 -	University of Louisiana, Monroe, 1974	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1980
Barry W. Ashe	Donald Trump (R)	August 30, 2018 -	Tulane University, 1978	Tulane University Law School, 1984
Wendy Vitter	Donald Trump (R)	May 29, 2019 -	Sam Houston State University, 1982	Tulane University Law School, 1986
Greg Guidry	Donald Trump (R)	June 21, 2019 -	Louisiana State University, 1982	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1985
Darrel Papillion	Joe Biden (D)	June 1, 2023 -	Louisiana State University, 1990	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1994
Brandon Long	Joe Biden (D)	December 19, 2023 -	University of Texas, 1999	Duke University School of Law, 2005

Active Article III judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of active judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 5
• Republican appointed: 4

Senior judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Mary Ann Lemmon	Bill Clinton (D)	January 1, 2011 -	Loyola University	Loyola Law, 1964
Ivan Lemelle	Bill Clinton (D)	June 29, 2015 -	Xavier University, 1971	Loyola Law, 1974
Carl Barbier	Bill Clinton (D)	January 1, 2023 -	Southeastern Louisiana University, 1966	Loyola Law, 1970
Eldon Fallon	Bill Clinton (D)	January 1, 2024 -	Tulane University, 1959	Tulane Law, 1962
Sarah Vance	Bill Clinton (D)	January 16, 2024 -	Louisiana State University, 1971	Tulane Law School, 1978
Lance Africk	George W. Bush (R)	October 1, 2024 -	University of North Carolina, 1973	University of North Carolina School of Law, 1975

Senior judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of senior judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 5
• Republican appointed: 1

Magistrate judges

Federal magistrate judges are federal judges who serve in United States district courts, but they are not appointed by the president and they do not serve life terms. Magistrate judges are assigned duties by the district judges in the district in which they serve. They may preside over most phases of federal proceedings, except for criminal felony trials. The specific duties of a magistrate judge vary from district to district, but the responsibilities always include handling matters that would otherwise be on the dockets of the district judges. Full-time magistrate judges serve for renewable terms of eight years. Some federal district courts have part-time magistrate judges, who serve for renewable terms of four years.

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Karen Wells Roby		February 22, 1999 -	Xavier University, 1983	Tulane Law, 1987
Michael B. North		March 1, 2014 -	Louisiana State University, 1987	Tulane Law, 1997
Janis van Meerveld		May 16, 2016 -	Tulane University, 1984	Tulane University, 1987
Donna Phillips Currault	United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana	June 1, 2020 -		Tulane University School of Law, 1989

Former chief judges

In order to qualify for the office of chief judge in an Article III circuit or district court, or on the United States Court of International Trade, a judge must be in active service and hold seniority over the court's commissioned judges who are 64 years of age or under, have served one year or more, and have not previously served as chief judge.

In the event that no judge on the court meets those qualifications, the youngest judge in regular active service aged 65 years or more and who has served as a judge for one year or more shall become chief judge. If no judge meets those qualifications, the judge holding seniority in active service who has not served as chief before shall become the chief judge.

The chief judge serves for a term of seven years until another judge becomes eligible to serve in the position. No judge is permitted to serve as chief judge after reaching the age of 70 years unless no other judge is qualified to serve.

Unlike the chief justice of the United States, a chief judge returns to active service after the expiration of their term and does not create a vacancy on the court by the fact of their promotion.

On the United States Court of Federal Claims, the chief judge is selected by the president of the United States. The judge must be less than 70 years of age. A chief may serve until they reach age 70 or until another judge is designated by the president as the new chief judge. If the president selects a new chief judge, the former chief judge may continue active service on the court for the remainder of their appointed term.

Kurt Engelhardt - (2015 - 2018) Sarah Vance - (2008 - 2015) Helen Berrigan - (2001 - 2008) Edith Clement - (2001) A.J. McNamara - (1999 - 2001) Morey Sear - (1992 - 1999)

Frederick Heebe - (1972 - 1992) Elmer West - (1967-1972) Herbert Christenberry - (1949 - 1967)

Former judges

For more information about the judges of the Eastern District of Louisiana, see former federal judges of the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Jurisdiction

Eastern District of Louisiana parishes (click for larger map)

The Eastern District of Louisiana has original jurisdiction over cases filed within its jurisdiction. Like all U.S. district courts, the court has original jurisdiction over civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States; certain civil actions between citizens of different states; civil actions within the admiralty or maritime jurisdiction of the United States; criminal prosecutions brought by the United States; and other types of cases and controversies. It also has appellate jurisdiction over a limited class of judgments, orders, and decrees.

The geographic jurisdiction of the Eastern District of Louisiana consists of all the following parishes in the eastern part of the state of Louisiana.

• Assumption Parish
• Jefferson Parish
• Lafourche Parish
• Orleans Parish
• Plaquemines Parish
• St. Bernard Parish
• St. Charles Parish
• St. James Parish
• St. John the Baptist Parish
• St. Tammany Parish
• Tangipahoa Parish
• Terrebonne Parish
• Washington Parish

Caseloads

This section contains court management statistics dating back to 2010. It was last updated in September 2024. Click [show] below for more information on caseload terms and definitions.

Caseload statistics explanation
Term	Explanation
Cases filed and terminated	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated or decided by the court in a calendar year. The chart below reflects the table columns Cases filed and Cases terminated.
Average time from filing to disposition	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to date of disposition (acquittal, sentencing, dismissal, etc.). The chart below reflects the table columns Median time (Criminal) and Median time (Civil).
Starting case load	The number of cases pending from the previous calendar year.
Cases filed	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated in a calendar year.
Cases terminated	The total number of civil and criminal lawsuits decided by the court in a calendar year.
Remaining cases	The number of civil and criminal cases pending at the end of a given year.
Median time (Criminal)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition. In criminal cases, the date of disposition occurs on the day of sentencing or acquittal/dismissal.
Median time (Civil)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition.
Three-year civil cases	The number and percent of civil cases that were filed more than three years before the end of the given calendar year.
Vacant posts	The number of months during the year an authorized judgeship was vacant.
Trial/Post	The number of trials completed divided by the number of authorized judgeships on the court. Trials include evidentiary trials, hearings on temporary restraining orders, and preliminary injunctions.
Source: United States Courts, "Explanation of the Judicial Caseload Profiles for United States District Courts," accessed September 25, 2018

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana caseload stats, 2010-2023
Year	Cases Filed	Cases Terminated	Cases Pending	Number of Judgeships	Vacant Judgeship Months	Average Total Filings per Judgeship	Trials Completed per Judgeship	Median time from filing to disposition, criminal	Median time from filing to disposition, civil	Three-year civil cases (#)	Three-year civil cases (%)
2010	5,121	10,348	10,186	12	13	427	13	8	39	2,293	24
2011	3,453	5,058	8,347	12	30	288	11	10	16	1,015	13
2012	3,416	6,200	5,710	12	3	285	9	10	28	1,326	25
2013	7,051	4,750	6,685	12	0	588	10	10	5	1,129	18
2014	3,175	3,334	6,384	12	0	265	8	11	10	1,059	18
2015	7,217	3,974	9,618	12	6	601	8	9	9	1,014	11
2016	17,519	4,997	22,129	12	16	1,460	10	15	7	2,519	12
2017	17,797	4,684	35,276	12	24	1,483	8	17	7	2,536	7
2018	14,253	7,089	42,506	12	28	1,188	7	13	10	5,350	13
2019	14,713	12,253	44,841	12	10	1,226	9	13	8	14,450	33
2020	3,196	18,296	29,759	12	0	266	3	15	35	16,011	55
2021	2,343	10,237	21,877	12	0	195	6	22	25	17,158	80
2022	5,419	9,406	17,900	12	11	452	7	20	71	12,760	74
2023	7,387	7,243	18,042	12	24	616	6	16	12	10,782	62
Average	8,004	7,705	19,947	12	12	667	8	13	20	6,386	32

History

Federal courts in Louisiana were established by Congress on March 26, 1804, with one post to cover the territory of Orleans. This was the one and only time that Congress granted a district court with the same jurisdiction as the state courts to a territory. On March 3, 1823, Congress divided the district into the Eastern District of Louisiana and the Western District of Louisiana. On February 13, 1845, Congress consolidated the districts into one district, with one post over the entire state. On March 3, 1849, Congress again divided the district into the Eastern District of Louisiana and the Western District of Louisiana only to reunite it into one district again on July 27, 1866. Congress divided the district most recently on March 3, 1881. Then on December 18, 1971, Congress split the Middle District of Louisiana from the two existing districts, resulting in the current jurisdictions. Over time six additional judicial posts were added to the Western District of Louisiana for a total of seven posts.

Judicial posts

The following table highlights the development of judicial posts for the Eastern District of Louisiana:

Year	Statute	Total Seats
March 26, 1804	2 Stat. 283	1(Whole State)
March 3, 1823	3 Stat. 774	1(1 shared)
February 13, 1845	5 Stat. 722	1(Whole State)
March 3, 1849	9 Stat. 401	1
July 27, 1866	14 Stat. 300	1(Whole state)
March 3, 1881	21 Stat. 507	1
March 18, 1938	52 Stat. 110	2
May 19, 1961	75 Stat. 80	4
March 18, 1966	80 Stat. 75	8
June 2, 1970	84 Stat. 294	10
December 18, 1971	85 Stat. 741	9
October 20, 1978	92 Stat. 1629	13
October 6, 1997	111 Stat. 1173	12

Noteworthy cases

For a searchable list of opinions, click here.

• Deepwater Horizon oil spill cases (2010-2014)      Judge(s):Carl Barbier (In re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig "Deepwater Horizon" in the Gulf of Mexico, on April 20, 2010, 792 F. Supp. 2d 926/No. MDL 2179)	Click for summary→
Judge Carl Barbier presided over the consolidated cases resulting from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, commonly referred to as the Deepwater Horizon spill. Barbier was chosen by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on August 10, 2010. In December 2012, Judge Barbier approved a $7.8 billion settlement from BP which covered private claims for loss of property and damage due to the spill. A limitless fund was also pledged to monitor the health of plaintiffs in the future. Though BP settled lawsuits with private citizens, a number of claims were not satisfied by this ruling. For example, in February 2014, Judge Barbier ruled that BP would not be able to view confidential documents submitted by investigator Louis Freeh, the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Freeh alleged private attorneys acted inappropriately during the claims processing portion of the case. Specifically, Freeh claimed a lawyer who formerly served on claims administrator Patrick Juneau's staff was used to improperly expedite certain claims. BP requested that Judge Barbier order Freeh to turn over the documents involved in his investigation, but the judge declined, noting that "BP [had] not established that it [was] more qualified to conduct the investigation than Mr. Freeh and the Freeh Group." Judge Barbier further stated the settlement program was court-supervised, and that if "BP's relief [were] granted, there [was] risk it [would] become a BP-supervised settlement program." In response to the press generated by this case, the Eastern District of Louisiana created a separate page for rulings in the case. To learn more about those rulings or read the official documents, visit: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, MDL-2179, Oil Spill by the Oil Rig "Deepwater Horizon."

• Ex-mayor of New Orleans convicted in conspiracy trial (2014)      Judge(s):Helen Berrigan (U.S. v. Nagin)	Click for summary→
On February 12, 2014, Judge Helen Berrigan presided over the trial of Ray Nagin, a former mayor of New Orleans, Louisiana. Nagin was convicted by a jury on twenty corruption-related charges, including conspiracy to commit bribery and honest services wire fraud. Nagin was accused of accepting gifts from city vendors in exchange for political favors, and charged on January 18, 2013. According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Nagin "accept[ed] numerous bribes and payoffs from consultants and contractors." Evidence provided at Nagin’s trial showed that, in addition to his participation in a conspiracy to launder money, he filed false tax returns from 2005 to 2008. On July 9, 2014, Nagin was sentenced to ten years in prison and ordered to pay $82,000 in restitution.

• Danziger Bridge convictions overturned following prosecutorial misconduct (2013)      Judge(s):Kurt Engelhardt (U.S. v. Bowen, at al, 2:10-cr-00204-KDE-SS)	Click for summary→
On September 17, 2013, Judge Kurt Engelhardt granted a motion for a new trial filed by the five former New Orleans police officers convicted in the Danziger Bridge shootings in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. In the underlying case, four of the officers were accused of firing upon a group of civilians on the bridge, killing two and injuring others, while a fifth officer was accused of hiding what happened on the bridge during his investigation of the incident. The group of officers was convicted in 2011, but requested a new trial following discovery of online comments involving the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Orleans. Three federal prosecutors were implicated, including former Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sal Perricone and Jan Mann, as well as Karla Dobinski, an attorney in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. The three posted "inflammatory invectives, accusatory screeds, and vitriolic condemnations" about the defendants in the Danziger Bridge case on NOLA.com while legal proceedings were still ongoing, including calls for a guilty verdict. In his opinion, Engelhardt overturned the police officers' convictions, citing "grotesque prosecutorial misconduct." Engelhardt concluded his discussion of the case saying, "[r]e-trying this case is a very small price to pay in order to protect the validity of the verdict in this case, the institutional integrity of the Court, and the criminal justice system as a whole." On April 20, 2016, the five officers admitted their guilt as part of a plea agreement. The four officers involved in the shooting received sentences ranging from seven to twelve years in prison. The officer involved in hiding the events of the shooting was sentenced to three years in prison. These sentences were lower than those in the first case where the four officers involved in the shooting were sentenced to a minimum of 38 years and the fifth officer was sentenced to seven.

• Drywall multi-district litigation (2009-2011)      Judge(s):Eldon Fallon (Fernandez v. Knauf, et.al, 2:09-md-02047-EEF-JCW)	Click for summary→
Judge Eldon Fallon presided over a trial for homeowners who sued Knauf Plasterboard, alleging the drywall provided by the company contained a sulfur-like substance that caused it to deteriorate, causing concerns that their homes may be unlivable. The judge heard the case as part of 600 different cases that were consolidated into a special multi-district litigation that would allow other homeowners to settle their cases out of court. On November 3, 2009, Judge Fallon certified class action status for the lawsuit so litigants across the country could pursue their cases in Louisiana as part of one case. The first fully contested trial in the drywall case resulted in a verdict on April 27, 2010. The judge ordered drywall manufacturer Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin Co. Ltd to pay a New Orleans couple $164,000 plus all necessary attorneys' fees after their drywall products damaged the home of Tatum and Charlene Hernandez in Louisiana. In December 2011, Knauf proposed an unlimited settlement to repair the homes with the defective drywall. In addition, the company offered $30 million for those who reported health problems because of the material. Courtroom documents: December 21, 2011, settlement Fernandez v. Knauf, et al ruling, April 22, 2010

• Hospital construction lawsuit (2010)      Judge(s):Eldon Fallon (National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, et al, Case 2:09-cv-05460-EEF-JCW)	Click for summary→
Judge Eldon Fallon ruled against two preservationists who opposed the U.S. Department of Veteran's Affairs and the State of Louisiana's decision to build two new hospitals near the French Quarter in New Orleans, Louisiana. On March 31, 2010, Fallon ruled the project could proceed, saying that enough environmental impact studies had been completed, a primary objection from the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

• Clipper Estates case (2009-2010)      Judge(s):Martin Feldman (Joffroin v. Tufaro, 606 F. 3d 235)	Click for summary→
Judge Martin Feldman dismissed a lawsuit filed by fifty residents of Clipper Estates in suburban New Orleans. Plaintiffs claimed violations of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The residents sued on allegations that the owner of Clipper Estates—also the President of the New Orleans Home Builders Association—used money he assessed against them after Hurricane Katrina for personal purposes instead of improving the subdivision as he promised. Judge Feldman dismissed the lawsuit claiming the plaintiffs had no standing under RICO. The case was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, where judges Thomas Reavley, Edward Prado, and Priscilla Richman affirmed Feldman's decision. It was determined that the plaintiffs in the case did not have standing after applying the three-part test from Whalen v. Carter, 954 F.2d 1087, 1093 (5th Cir.1992).

• Road home thief case (2009)      Judge(s):Sarah Vance (USA v. Dowl, 2:08-cr-00164-SSV-SS)	Click for summary→
Judge Sarah Vance presided in the case of Barbara Simmons Dowl, who was charged for her role in the collection of Road Home funds, moneys offered by the federal government for the rebuilding of homes following Hurricane Katrina in 2004. Dowl was convicted of theft, making false statements, and wire fraud in June 2009, after it was discovered she had collected and spent funds received for a property she did not own. Vance sentenced Dowl to six years in prison on October 7, 2009, one more year than the federal sentencing minimum, citing the emotional distress of victims, the owners of the property Dowl claimed was hers.

Federal courthouse

The Eastern District of Louisiana operates from the Hale Boggs Federal Building and Courthouse in New Orleans.

About United States District Courts

The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal courts. There are 94 such courts. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of both law and equity.

There is a United States bankruptcy court and a number of bankruptcy judges associated with each United States district court. Each federal judicial district has at least one courthouse, and most districts have more than one.

There is at least one judicial district for each state, and one each for Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. District courts in three insular areas—the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands—exercise the same jurisdiction as U.S. district courts. Despite their name, these courts are technically not District Courts of the United States. Judges on these territorial courts do not enjoy the protections of Article III of the Constitution, and serve terms of 10 years rather than for life.

There are 677 U.S. District Court judgeships.

The number of federal district judge positions is set by the U.S. Congress in Title 28 of the U.S. Code, Section 133, which authorizes a set number of judge positions, or judgeships, making changes and adjustments in these numbers from time to time.

In order to relieve the pressure of trying the hundreds of thousands of cases brought before the federal district courts each year, many trials are tried by juries, along with a presiding judge.

Appointments by president

The chart below shows the number of district court judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate through November 1 of the fourth year of each president's term in office. At this point in the term, President Bill Clinton had the most district court appointments with 169.

Judges by district

See also: Judicial vacancies in federal courts

The table below displays the number of judges in each district and indicates how many were appointed by presidents from each major political party. It also includes the number of vacancies in a district and how many pending nominations for that district are before the United States Senate. The table can be sorted by clicking the column headers above the line, and you can navigate through the pages by clicking the arrows at the top of the table. It is updated every Monday.

Judicial selection

The district courts are served by Article III federal judges who are appointed for life during "good behavior." They are usually first recommended by senators (or members of the House, occasionally). The President of the United States makes the appointments, which must then be confirmed by the U.S. Senate in accordance with Article III of the United States Constitution.

Step	A Candidacy Proceeds	A Candidacy Halts
1. Recommendation made by Congress Member to the President	President Nominates to Senate Judiciary Committee	President Declines Nomination
2. Senate Judiciary Committee interviews Candidate	Sends candidate to Senate for confirmation	Returns candidate to President, who may re-nominate to Committee
3. Senate votes on candidate confirmation	Candidate becomes federal judge	Candidate does not receive judgeship

Magistrate judges

The district courts are also served by magistrate judges. Congress created the judicial office of federal magistrate in 1968. In 1990, the position title was changed to magistrate judge. The chief judge of each district appoints one or more magistrate judges, who discharge many of the ancillary duties of district judges so judges can handle more trials. There are both full-time and part-time magistrate judge positions, and these positions are assigned to the district courts according to caseload criteria (subject to funding by Congress). A full-time magistrate judge serves a term of eight years; a part-time magistrate judge's term of office is four years.

See also

• United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
• United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
• United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
• United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

External links

• Official website of the Eastern District of Louisiana
• Opinions of the Eastern District of Louisiana
• U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana