Sumpter et al v. Ahlbrecht et al

Filing 111

ORDER. ORDERED that because the District Court is divested of jurisdiction over this matter, both the Final Trial Preparation Conference set for March 30, 2012 and the Jury Trial set for April 23, 2012 are hereby VACATED pending a resolution of the interlocutory appeal by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 02/29/12. (jjhsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
Civil Action No. 10-cv-00580-WYD-MJW
SEAN SUMPTER;
KYLE SUMPTER;
GEORGE SUMPTER; and
KATHIE SUMPTER;
Plaintiffs,
v.
NATHAN AHLBRECHT, individually and in his capacity as an Investigator and
Employee of the Elbert County Sheriff’s Office;
WILLIAM FRANGIS, individually and in his capacity as an Employee of the Elbert
County Sheriff’s Office;
ROBERT PETERSON, individually and in his capacity as an Employee of the Elbert
County Sheriff’s Office;
DOUG DIXON, individually and in his capacity as an Employee of the Elbert County
Sheriff’s Office;
SHAYNE HEAP, individually and in his capacity as an Employee of the Elbert County
Sheriff’s Office;
MICHELLE NAIL, individually and in her capacity as an Employee of the Elbert County
Sheriff’s Office;
ELBERT COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; and
ELBERT COUNTY;
Defendants.

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon review of the file. On February 24,
2012, Defendants filed a Notice of Appeal in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. The
appeal relates to my Order of January 26, 2012, denying in part and granting in part
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment which sought qualified immunity on various

claims. I also denied in part and granted in part Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary
Judgment. Defendants’ interlocutory appeal is currently pending in the Tenth Circuit.
The Tenth Circuit holds that the “filing of a notice of appeal is an event of
jurisdictional significance-it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the
district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.”
Stewart v. Donges, 915 F.2d 572, 574 (10th Cir. 1990). Any subsequent action by the
district court once it is divested of jurisdiction is null and void. Id. “The district court only
retains jurisdiction over tangential matters such as determining ‘the propriety and
amount of attorney's fees,’ ... and performing ‘certain ministerial functions in aid of the
appeal, such as correcting clerical mistakes in the record, approving appeal bonds, and
issuing stays or injunctions pending the appeal.’” Id. at 575 n. 3 (quotation omitted).
The divestiture of jurisdiction occasioned by the filing of a notice of appeal is
especially significant when the appeal is an interlocutory one. Id. An interlocutory
appeal disrupts ongoing proceedings in the district court. When the interlocutory appeal
is from the denial of a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the
central issue in the appeal is the defendant's asserted right not to have to proceed to
trial. Id. “[W]hen an interlocutory appeal is taken, the district court [only] retains
jurisdiction to proceed with matters not involved in that appeal.” Id. In such cases the
divestiture of jurisdiction brought about by the defendant's filing of a notice of appeal is
virtually complete, leaving the district court with jurisdiction only over peripheral matters
unrelated to the disputed right not to have to defend the prosecution or action at trial.
Id.; see also Walker v. City of Orem, 451 F.3d 1139, 1146 (10th Cir. 2006) (an
interlocutory appeal refusing to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds divests the

-2-

district court “from granting further relief concerning the issues on appeal”, even where
the relief granted favored the appealing party).
In the case at hand, I find that the interlocutory appeal divests this Court of
jurisdiction to preside over both the Final Trial Preparation Conference set for March 30,
2012 and the Jury Trial set for April 23, 2012. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that because the District Court is divested of jurisdiction over this
matter, both the Final Trial Preparation Conference set for March 30, 2012 and the Jury
Trial set for April 23, 2012 are hereby VACATED pending a resolution of the
interlocutory appeal.
Dated: February 29, 2012
BY THE COURT:

s/ Wiley Y. Daniel
Wiley Y. Daniel
Chief United States District Judge

-3-