Doe v. City of Albuquerque

Filing 56

[9939388] Stipulation filed by Appellee Mr. John Doe and Appellant City of Albuquerque as to appellee's motion for attorneys' fees and costs. Served on: 02/02/2012. Manner of service: ECF/NDA. --[Edited docket event, text, and filer 02/02/2012 by SLS to reflect title of pleading filed.] PBD

Download PDF
Case No. 10-2102 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, Defendant-Appellant. _________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico The Honorable M. Christina Armijo United States District Judge Case No. 08-CV-1041 MCA/LFG __________________________________________________________________ STIPULATION AS TO APPELLEE’S MOTION FOR AN ORDER AWARDING APPELLATE ATTORNEYS’ FEES, EXPENSES AND COSTS AND REMANDING TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR DETERMINATION _______________________________________________________________ Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, EBEL and O’BRIEN, Circuit Judges. __________________________________________________________________ The parties, through undersigned counsel, stipulate that: 1. The Plaintiff-Appellee is a prevailing party on this appeal for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and therefore entitled to an award of appellate attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs. 2. This matter should be remanded to the district court to allow it to determine the appropriate amount of Plaintiff-Appellee’s appellate attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs, along with its determination of the appropriate amount of Plaintiff-Appellee’s attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs incurred during litigation in the district court. See, e.g., Roth v. Green, 466 F.3d 1179 (10 th Cir. 2006) (remanding to district court for determination of appellate attorneys’ fees and costs); Kansas Reapportionment, 745 F.2d at 614 (same) (citations omitted). 3. On January 26, 2012, Appellee filed his motion requesting (1) an order from this Court awarding him his reasonable appellate attorneys fees, costs, and expenses; and (2) that, in such an order, this Court remand the determination of such appellate fees, costs, and expenses to the district court. Appellant indicated that it was opposing Appellee’s requested relief because it needed more time to consider the issue and its options. On January 27, 2012, this Court ordered Appellant to file a response to Appellee’s motion for appellate fees, costs, and expenses by February 10, 2012. Since the filing of these pleadings, Appellee and Appellant have conferred in good faith and reached the above-referenced stipulation, thereby obviating the need for Appellant to file a response. Respectfully submitted, ROTHSTEIN, DONATELLI, HUGHES, DAHLSTROM, SCHOENBURG & BIENVENU, LLP /s/ Brendan K. Egan Brendan K. Egan Cooperating Attorney, New Mexico Civil Liberties Foundation 500 4th Street NW, Suite 400 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 (505) 243-1443 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEW MEXICO Laura Schauer Ives Managing Attorney P.O. Box 566 Albuquerque, NM 87103 (505) 243-0046 Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellee /s/ Philip B. Davis Philip B. Davis Co-Legal Director, ACLU-NM 814 Marquette Avenue, NW Albuquerque, NM 87102 (505) 242-1904 Plaintiff’s Fee Counsel 3 /s/ Gregory S. Wheeler (approved by telephone 2/2/12 - pbd) Gregory S. Wheeler & Peter H. Pierotti Assistant Albuquerque City Attorneys P.O. Box 2248 Albuquerque, NM 87103 Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant CERTIFICATE OF DIGITAL SUBMISSION I hereby certify that all required privacy redactions have been made and, with the exception of those redactions, every document submitted in Digital Form or scanned PDF format is an exact copy of the written document filed with the Clerk. I also certify that the digital submissions have been scanned on February 2, 2012 for viruses with the most recent version of a commercial virus scanning program AVG Anti-Virus Version 9.0.927, and, according to the program, are free of viruses. /s/ Philip B. Davis Philip B. Davis 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?