Federal Judicial ServiceMagistrate Judge, United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Appointed on October 1, 2016
University of Florida, 2000
University of Florida Levin College of Law, J.D., 2004
Private Practice, Miami Florida, 2004–2006Law Clerk, The Honorable William Terrell Hodges, United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 2006–2007
Assistant United States Attorney, Middle District of Florida, 2007–2016
Judge Irick welcomes applications for unpaid judicial internships and externships for the fall, spring, and summer terms. Positions are competitive and limited to students who have completed their first (1L) or second (2L) years at an accredited law school. Preference is given to applicants with strong academic standing and demonstrated legal writing skills. Summer internships and externships may be voluntary or for academic credit offered through an accredited law school in which the student is enrolled. Fall and spring internships and externships must be for academic credit offered through an accredited law school in which the student is enrolled. Internship and externship applicants must email a cover letter, a resume, at least one recent writing sample, and a current academic transcript to the chambers e-mail account. Applicants must also be available for an in-person interview.
Uniform Case Management Report (DOC)
See this brochure for general information on United States magistrate judges.
Any assertion of fact in a motion must be supported by an affidavit or testimony or be uncontested by the opposition before it will be accepted by the court.
Confidentiality orders should be limited to documents or specific categories of documents that are subject to confidential treatment under prevailing law. Judge Irick will not issue blanket confidentiality orders that provide that any information designated by the parties as confidential will be protected. However, the parties are free to enter into private confidentiality agreements. See Local Rule 4.15. Under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party must show good cause before a court will issue a protective order. In rare circumstances, the court may order the filing of information under seal. See Middle District Discovery Handbook Section I. C. 2. If a party asks to file information under seal, he or she should address Eleventh Circuit precedent setting forth the governing standard and the public's interests and the requirements of Local Rule 1.09. See Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court for Norfolk Cty., 457 U.S. 596, 606–07 (1982); Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978); Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1311–12 (11th Cir. 2001); United States v. Rosenthal, 763 F.2d 1291, 1293 (11th Cir. 1985); Microlumen, Inc. v. Allegrati, Case No. 8:07-cv-350-T-17TBM, 2007 WL 1247068 (M.D. Fla. April 30, 2007).
Generally, counsel may remain at counsel table when addressing or presenting argument to the court. Alternatively, counsel may choose to stand at the lectern when presenting argument. However, the court requires all counsel to stand when addressing the court unless counsel affirmatively requests and obtains leave to remain seated for a medical or other compelling reason. The court also requires all counsel to speak clearly into the microphones provided at counsel table or at the lectern when addressing the court or when examining testifying witnesses.
Judge Irick’s courtroom has audio-visual capabilities that parties may use provided they make advance arrangements. Counsel and unrepresented parties who wish to reserve the court’s equipment should contact Judge Irick’s courtroom deputy well before the date of the hearing or trial. If counsel and unrepresented parties wish to bring their own equipment into the courtroom for the hearing or trial, they must apply for permission to do so and obtain an order granting that request well before the hearing or trial begins.
Few motions qualify as true emergencies. Emergency motions should be designated as such in the caption of the motion. See Local Rule 3.01(e). Emergency motions should be served on opposing counsel, and any necessary non-parties, by hand delivery or other equivalent method of service. If a motion is not a true emergency but is time-sensitive, counsel may indicate the matter is time-sensitive in the caption of the motion and in the body of the motion explain why the matter requires expedited consideration.
Before filing or responding to any motion in a civil case, the parties should review and comply with the standards set forth in the Middle District of Florida Handbook on Civil Discovery Practice. Before filing any discovery-related motion in a civil case, the moving party must confer with counsel for the opposing party in a good-faith effort to resolve the issues raised by the motion. Local Rule 3.01(g). The moving party must also file with the motion a statement certifying that the moving party has conferred with opposing counsel and that counsel have been unable to reach an agreement on the resolution of the motion. The term “confer” in Local Rule 3.01(g) requires a substantive conversation in person or by telephone in a good-faith effort to resolve the motion without court action. Exchanges of ultimatums by email or letter—especially those that do not allow adequate time for a response—do not satisfy the good-faith conference requirement. Similarly, mere attempts to confer that do not result in a meaningful and productive exchange between counsel do not satisfy the requirement. The court may deny motions that fail to include an appropriate and complete Local Rule 3.01(g) certificate. Additionally, failure to comply fully with Local Rule 3.04 will cause a discovery motion to be denied. Requests for leave to exceed page limits imposed by Local Rule 3.01 and requests for leave to file reply memoranda on routine discovery motions are strongly disfavored absent a showing of good cause.
If a dispute arises during a deposition in a case in which Judge Irick is the assigned magistrate judge, counsel and any unrepresented parties may contact chambers to determine whether the judge is available to consider the disputed issue by telephone. Subject to the court's availability and other considerations, the court may convene an informal telephone conference to hear argument from the parties and, to the extent possible, to issue an oral order on the issues presented, all of which must be recorded by the parties’ private court reporter. Depending upon the issues presented, the court may order the parties to submit expedited or truncated briefing on the issues before ruling. If the court declines to convene an informal telephone conference for any reason, the parties must promptly submit the matter to the court for consideration in the manner prescribed by Local Rule 3.01.
Hearings on motions are scheduled at the written request of the parties or, from time to time, by order of the judge without a request from the parties. Witnesses and other evidence are not permitted at oral argument unless the parties obtain permission to present evidence before the hearing. Counsel and unrepresented parties who wish to present argument are generally required to appear in court in person. The courtroom deputy will schedule oral arguments and evidentiary hearings. Although in-person appearances are presumed, the court may permit appearance by telephone—for good cause—on request.
When appropriate, the court would appreciate receiving a notebook of the relevant authorities (preferably with the pertinent portions highlighted). For evidentiary hearings, the court would appreciate receiving copies of witness and exhibit lists before the hearing and a set of exhibits, whether in electronic or paper form, at the hearing.
Local Rule 3.01(a) requires that "[i]n a motion or other application for an order, the movant shall include ... a memorandum of legal authority in support of the request." Failure to comply fully and meaningfully with Local Rule 3.01(a) may result in denial of a motion.
If a pending motion is rendered moot (i.e., no longer requires court intervention) due to a later agreement between the affected parties or some other occurrence, the court requests that the movant immediately file an appropriate notice that either:
To establish an orderly and efficient procedure for designating information and documents withheld from discovery on the basis of a privilege or other recognized protection, Judge Irick has issued a standing order, No. 6:16-mc-48-Orl-DCI, which governs the procedure regarding the assertion of privilege in all cases assigned to Judge Irick. Any motion to compel or motion for a protective order that fails to comply with those procedures will be denied.
All proceedings before Judge Irick are recorded by the courtroom audio recording system or by a court reporter. The parties are not permitted to use a court reporter or other recording system to make a record of the proceedings conducted by Judge Irick except with his prior consent. Transcripts of audio-recorded proceedings can be obtained by making a written request to Judge Irick’s courtroom deputy clerk.
Whenever a party submits a proposed order to the court, the court would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy emailed to chambers, preferably in Microsoft Word format (.doc or .docx).
Upon consent of the parties, Judge Irick will schedule bench and jury trials to begin on a date certain. The parties should provide the court with two copies of witness and exhibit lists the morning of trial. All exhibits should be marked before trial. In addition, parties should provide Judge Irick with a bench book containing copies of documentary exhibits they intend to use at trial, which copies should be marked with exhibit numbers. Judge Irick also appreciates receiving an electronic version of the parties’ proposed jury instructions, or proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, in Microsoft Word format (.doc or .docx) before the final pretrial conference, which may be emailed to chambers.
Generally, the court will conduct voir dire, taking the proposed questions from the parties into account. However, in appropriate circumstances, the court will allow counsel to conduct voir dire. If counsel maintains there is good cause for allowing the lawyers to conduct voir dire in a particular case, they should file a motion requesting permission to do so and stating the specific basis for their request.