Montez, et al v. Romer, et al
ORDER OF SPECIAL MASTER re: Claimant Ronald Cordova (Claim No. 03-377). Claimant's documents ( 3762 MOTION, 3846 MOTION for Relief, 3858 Affidavit) will be accepted for filing and will be held in abeyance, by Special Master Richard M. Borchers on 09/16/2009. (wjc, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 92-CV-870-JLK JESSE MONTEZ, et al. Plaintiffs, -vs.BILL RITTER, et al. Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ Claim Number 03-377 Category III Claimant: Ronald Cordova, #57350 Address of Claimant: SCF, P.O. Box 6000, Sterling, CO 80751 ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER OF SPECIAL MASTER ______________________________________________________________________________ THIS MATTER comes before the Special Master on three documents filed by Claimant. The first is entitled "motion for Defendants and counsel to comply to final order of Special Master." (#3762). The second document is entitled "motion for relief." (#3846). The third document is entitled "affidavit" and attached is a proposed order to show cause. (#3858). Judge Kane held a hearing on September 1, 2009 and reviewed all aspects of this case. The issue of continuing jurisdiction over claims filed pursuant to Article XXXII of the Remedial Plan was argued by class counsel and counsel for Defendants. Judge Kane took the issue under advisement. All of Claimant's documents are intertwined with the jurisdictional issue. The documents will be held in abeyance pending Judge Kane's order. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Claimant's documents will be accepted for filing and will be held in abeyance. SIGNED this 16th day of September, 2009.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Richard M. Borchers ________________________________________ Richard M. Borchers Special Master
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?