Sarah Elizabeth Pitlyk at a glance
- Current role
- Judge
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri · Federal
- Judicial service
- December 5, 2019–present
Sarah Elizabeth Pitlyk
Judge · U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Available research
Case AnalyticsPrecomputed 1Y, 2Y, 5Y, and 10Y public federal docket metricsAI abuse cases2 directly linked casesBiography and careerSource-attributed professional, judicial, and education recordCourtroom rules3 sourced items, labeled by scopeSourcesOfficial and public records supporting this profile
Loading public docket analytics…
Loading public docket analytics…
AI abuse cases
2 casesAI-related ruling · May 19, 2026
Syreeta LaShawn McNeal v. Vera L. Calvin, et al.
- Court response
- Order to provide certification with every future filing
AI-related ruling · March 31, 2026
Jaii LeShawn Quinones v. Unknown Love, et al.
- Court response
- Show Cause Order
Biography
Professional career
- Special Counsel, Thomas More Society, 2017-2019
- Practitioner, Clark & Sauer LLC, 2013-2016
- Covington & Burling LLP, 2011-2012
- Practitioner, Covington & Burling LLP, 2008-2010
Judicial service
- Law Clerk to the Hon. Brett Kavanaugh, District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2010-2011
- Judge, District Court, E.D. Missouri, MO, 2019-present
Education
- Yale University · JD, 2008
- Georgetown University · Philosophy, 2006
- Boston College · Philosophy, 1999
Personal record
Born 1977 · Indiandapolis, IN
Courtroom rules and guidance
Courtroom Technology
Courtwide presentation-related guidance applies to this judge.
Telephonic Interpretation for non- English speaking participants . Table interface at the attorney tables to allow connection of laptops for displaying digital documents, video, etc. through the Courtroom multimedia system.Courtroom Technology | Eastern District of Missouri | United States District Court ↗
Civil Remote Testimony
In federal district-court civil proceedings, testimony is ordinarily taken in open court; remote contemporaneous testimony requires good cause in compelling circumstances and appropriate safeguards.
For good cause in compelling circumstances and with appropriate safeguards, the court may permit testimony in open court by contemporaneous transmission from a different location.Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), Testimony in Open Court ↗
Criminal Recording And Broadcasting
Federal district courts may not permit courtroom photography or broadcasting during criminal judicial proceedings unless a statute or another federal rule provides an exception.
Except as otherwise provided by a statute or these rules, the court must not permit the taking of photographs in the courtroom during judicial proceedings or the broadcasting of judicial proceedings from the courtroom.Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53, Courtroom Photographing and Broadcasting Prohibited ↗
Sources
Federal Judicial Center biography
Identity source · HTML · checked July 25, 2026
https://www.fjc.gov/node/7465646CourtListener judicial biographical directory
Identity source · HTML · checked August 2, 2026
https://www.courtlistener.com/person/15366/sarah-elizabeth-pitlyk/Courtroom Technology | Eastern District of Missouri | United States District Court
Judge research source · HTML · checked July 24, 2026
https://www.moed.uscourts.gov/courtroom-technologyFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), Testimony in Open Court
Judge research source · HTML · checked July 26, 2026
https://www.uscourts.gov/forms-rules/current-rules-practice-procedure/federal-rules-civil-procedureFederal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53, Courtroom Photographing and Broadcasting Prohibited
Judge research source · HTML · checked July 26, 2026
https://www.uscourts.gov/court-records/access-court-proceedings/remote-public-access-proceedings/history-cameras-broadcasting-and-remote-public-access-courts