Tcl - Tenth Circuit Summaries - September 2006 - U.s. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
| Publication year | 2006 |
| Pages | 165 |
2006, September, Pg. 165. TCL - Tenth Circuit Summaries - September 2006 - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
September 2006
Vol. 35, No. 9 [Page 165]
Summaries of selected Opinions appear on a space-available basis. The summaries are prepared for the Colorado Bar Association by Jenine Jensen and Katherine Campbell, licensed Colorado attorneys. The summaries of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit are provided as a service by the Colorado Bar Association and are not the official language of the Court. The Colorado Bar Association cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the summaries. Full copies of the Tenth Circuit decisions are accessible from the CBA website, http: //www.cobar.org/hotlinks.cfm (United States Courts link to the Tenth Circuit).
Attorney Fees - Prevailing Party - Private Settlement - Consent Decree - Success on Merits
Bell v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, No. 05-3224, 6/20/2006, D.Kan., Judge Lucero.
Plaintiff sued his former employer, claiming it had violated his civil rights by terminating his employment. A jury returned a verdict in his favor on one of his three claims, but awarded only nominal damages. Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. The district court awarded reduced attorney fees, reflecting the limited success of the plaintiff's claims. Plaintiff appealed both the judgment and the attorney fee award. While the case was on appeal, plaintiff secured a money settlement from the defendant, in return for which he agreed to dismiss his merits appeal. The district court denied plaintiff's subsequent motion to reconsider the attorney fee award in light of his success in obtaining a settlement. Plaintiff appealed that order, as well as the original attorney fee order.
The Tenth Circuit Court first noted that an attorney fee award should be reassessed when the prevailing party's overall success has been altered on appeal. A private settlement, however, does not justify an award of attorney fees, because it does not involve judicial approval and continuing judicial oversight, as is the case with a consent decree. Therefore, if a court does not incorporate a private settlement into an order and retain jurisdiction to enforce it, the settlement does not bear any of the marks of a consent decree and does not confer prevailing-party status. Accordingly, the Circuit affirmed the order denying reconsideration of the initial attorney fee award.
The Circuit also affirmed the initial award of a reduced attorney fee, concluding that the district court had considered the proper factors, properly emphasizing the degree of success achieved. The judgment was affirmed.
Criminal Defendant's Right to Represent Himself - Timely Motion Made Before Voir Dire - Automatic Reversal
U.S. v. Tucker, No. 05-3259, 06/28/2006, D.Kan., Judge McConnell.
A jury convicted defendant of being a felon in possession of ammunition and acquitted him of being a felon in possession of a firearm. After numerous delays and a change in...
To continue reading
Request your trial