Case: Floyd v. Ortiz

1:81-cv-01754 | U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado

Filed Date: Oct. 5, 1981

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In October 1981, inmates at various state penal institutions in Colorado filed a pro se lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Colorado Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants had violated their constitutional rights, depriving them of property by keeping the inmate funds in non-interest bearing accounts.In February 1982, the parties entered into a settlement agreement in the U.S. District Court for the D…

In October 1981, inmates at various state penal institutions in Colorado filed a pro se lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Colorado Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants had violated their constitutional rights, depriving them of property by keeping the inmate funds in non-interest bearing accounts.

In February 1982, the parties entered into a settlement agreement in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, in which the plaintiffs relinquished their claims for interest earned on individual accounts and agreed to pursue grievance procedures before bringing legal claims in the future. The action was never formally dismissed by the court. In November 1983, the court reopened the case and entered an amended agreement, clarifying that the inmates would have separate, individualized accounts within the umbrella of the inmate trust account.

In May 2001, the plaintiffs asked the court to enforce the terms of the agreement and hold the defendants in contempt of court for failing to comply. The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Judge John Kane) denied the plaintiff's petition, and the plaintiff appealed. On August 28, 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Judge Carlos Lucero) denied the plaintiff's appeal, affirming the district court's decision. Floyd v. Ortiz, 300 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2002). On May 21, 2003, the case was closed.

In May 2009, however, a motion to enforce the consent decree was again brought, this time by another inmate, acting as an Interested Party. Judge Kane granted the defendant's subsequent, and unopposed, motion to terminate prospective relief. The inmate filed a notice of appeal in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals but failed to pay the filing fee. Consequently, his appeal was dismissed for lack of prosecution.

Summary Authors

Kristen Sagar (3/31/2006)

Kevin Nomura (3/9/2015)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5029114/parties/floyd-v-ricketts/


Judge(s)

Kane, John L. Jr. (Colorado)

Lucero, Carlos F. (Colorado)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Katzman, Steven Bruce (Colorado)

Attorney for Defendant

Dailey, John Daniel (Colorado)

Gellar, Nicole S. (Colorado)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

1:81-cv-01754

Docket

Floyd v. Ricketts

Sept. 14, 2010

Sept. 14, 2010

Docket

01-01295

Reported Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Aug. 28, 2002

Aug. 28, 2002

Order/Opinion

300 F.3d 1223

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5029114/floyd-v-ricketts/

Last updated March 18, 2026, 5:31 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 May 13, 2009

MOTION to Enforce Consent Decree, Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 71 by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (wjc, ) (Entered: 05/14/2009)

RECAP
2 June 11, 2009

LETTER by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (wjc, ) (Entered: 06/11/2009)

RECAP
3 June 16, 2009

STATEMENT re 1 MOTION to Enforce Consent Decree, Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 71 by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (Document actually entitled Status and Update Request Regarding: MOTION to Enforce Consent Decree, Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 71. (wjc, ) (Entered: 06/16/2009)

RECAP
4 Dec. 11, 2009

MOTION for Ruling on the Pending 3 Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 71 Motion, and Combined Motion for Replacement of Class Counsel, by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (wjc, ) Modified on 12/14/2009 to correct grammar (wjc, ). (Entered: 12/11/2009)

RECAP
5 Dec. 17, 2009

ORDER: Mr. Katzman is ORDERED to review Docs. 1-4 filed by Mr. Rueb and to confer with counsel of record or an appropriate designee Colorado Attorney Generals Office in an effort to resolve any DOC noncompliance with the Agreement. The Clerk shall ef ile this Order to Mr. Katzmans address of record and also send a courtesy copy to the address obtained from the 2009 Colorado Legal Directory. Counsel shall confer for the overarching purpose of REEXAMINING the Complaint in this case, together with the 1982 Agreements on which Judgment entered, as amended, with an eye to further amendment up to and including a formal closure/dismissal this action in its entirety. Joint Status Report due 01/15/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 12/17/2009. (wjc, ) (Added on 12/18/2009: # 1 Correct Main Document) (lam, ). Modified on 12/18/2009 to add correct pdf(lam, ).

RECAP
6 Dec. 17, 2009

CERTIFICATE of Mailing by Clerk of Court re 5 Order. (wjc, ) (Entered: 12/17/2009)

RECAP
7 Dec. 18, 2009

Docket Annotation re: 5 Order. This entry was modified to add the correct pdf. Text only entry - no document attached (lam, ) (Entered: 12/18/2009)

RECAP
8 Jan. 15, 2010

Class - Plaintiff Rueb's REPLY to the District Court's 12/17/09 5 Order by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (wjc, ) (Entered: 01/15/2010)

RECAP
9 Jan. 15, 2010

MOTION for Extension of Time to file Joint Status Report by Plaintiffs James Montoya, John Potter, Eugene Velarde, Richard Velarde, Johnny H. Clay, Kenneth Floyd, Ernest L. Walker, Harold Turman, Leroy Martinez, Donald G. Emig, Defendants James G. Ricketts, Colorado Department of Corrections. (Gellar, Nicole) (Entered: 01/15/2010)

RECAP
10 Jan. 15, 2010

MINUTE ORDER granting 9 Joint Motion for an Extension of Time to Prepare Joint Status Report. Status Report due by 2/16/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 01/15/2010.(wjc, ) (Entered: 01/15/2010)

RECAP
11 Feb. 1, 2010

Plaintiff Rueb's Additional (SUPPLEMENT/AMENDMENT) Evidentiary Submission, in Support of His 1 Rule 71 Consent Decree Enforcement MOTION by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (wjc, ) (Entered: 02/01/2010)

RECAP
12 Feb. 16, 2010

Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Joint Status Report by Plaintiffs James Montoya, John Potter, Eugene Velarde, Richard Velarde, Johnny H. Clay, Kenneth Floyd, Ernest L. Walker, Harold Turman, Leroy Martinez, Donald G. Emig, Defendants James G. Ricketts, Colorado Department of Corrections, Interested Party Justin Rueb. (Gellar, Nicole) (Entered: 02/16/2010)

RECAP
13 Feb. 17, 2010

MINUTE ORDER granting 12 Second Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Prepare Joint Status Report. Status Report due by 3/2/2010, by Judge John L. Kane on 02/17/2010.(wjc, ) (Entered: 02/17/2010)

RECAP
14 March 1, 2010

Class-Plaintiff Rueb's STATUS Update (REPORT), in Reply to a Recent Letter He Received from Class Counsel, by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (ebs, ) (Entered: 03/02/2010)

RECAP
15 March 2, 2010

Joint STATUS REPORT by Plaintiffs James Montoya, John Potter, Eugene Velarde, Richard Velarde, Johnny H. Clay, Kenneth Floyd, Ernest L. Walker, Harold Turman, Leroy Martinez, Donald G. Emig, Defendants James G. Ricketts, Colorado Department of Corrections, Interested Party Justin Rueb. (Gellar, Nicole) (Entered: 03/02/2010)

RECAP
16 March 2, 2010

Unopposed MOTION to Dismiss Terminate Prospective Relief Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3626(b) by Defendants James G. Ricketts, Colorado Department of Corrections. (Gellar, Nicole) (Entered: 03/02/2010)

RECAP
17 March 4, 2010

ORDER. Unopposed Motion to Terminate Prospective Relief Under 18 U.S.C. §3626 (b) is GRANTED. The prospective relief afforded the named inmates under the terms of the 1982 settlement agreement, as amended in 1984, is TERMINATED and this case is DEEMED CLOSED. No further pro se filings will be accepted in this case, and any filings received in contravention of this order may be STRICKEN. By Judge John L. Kane on 03/04/2010.(sah, )

RECAP
18 March 22, 2010

MOTION to Reconsider and Vacate the 17 Court's 03/04/2010 Order Granting Termination of the Consent Decree in this Case, by Interested Party Justin Rueb. (wjc, ) (Entered: 03/22/2010)

RECAP
20 March 22, 2010

NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 17 Order on Motion to Enforce, Order on Motion for Ruling, Order on Motion to Dismiss, by Interested Party Justin Rueb. Fee Status: Fee not paid; 1915 motion not filed. Notice mailed to all counsel on 03/23/10. (Attachments: # 1 Envelope)(bjrsl, ) (Entered: 03/23/2010)

1 Envelope

View on PACER

RECAP
19 March 23, 2010

ORDER denying 18 Nonparty Justin Rueb's Motion for Reconsideration. Any further pro se filings in this closed case by Mr. Rueb will be STRICKEN, by Judge John L. Kane on 03/23/2010.(wjc, )

RECAP
21 March 23, 2010

LETTER Transmitting Notice of Appeal to all counsel advising of the transmittal of the 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Justin Rueb to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (Pro se; Fee not paid; 1915 motion not filed.) (Attachments: # 1 Docket Sheet, # 2 Preliminary Record including Notice of Appeal)(bjrsl, ) (Entered: 03/23/2010)

1 Docket Sheet

View on PACER

2 Preliminary Record including Notice of Appeal

View on PACER

RECAP
22 March 24, 2010

USCA Case Number 10-1106 for 20 Notice of Appeal filed by Justin Rueb. Filing fee or 1915 motion due in district court within 30 days.(bjrsl, ) (Entered: 03/25/2010)

RECAP
23 March 29, 2010

ORDER to Cure Deficiency re 20 Notice of Appeal by Justin Rueb, by Judge John L. Kane on 03/29/10. Appellant has 30 days to either pay the filing fee or file a proper 1915 motion with district court.(bjrsl, ) (Entered: 03/29/2010)

RECAP
24 May 10, 2010

LETTER to U.S. Court of Appeals advising that the filing fee has not been paid and a 1915 motion has not been filed as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Justin Rueb. (USCA Case No. 10-1106) (bjrsl, ) (Entered: 05/10/2010)

RECAP
25 May 11, 2010

USCA LETTER as to 20 Notice of Appeal by Justin Rueb. Appellant has 40 days to either pay the filing fee to district court or apply to the Court of Appeals for leave to proceed without prepayment of fees. Briefing schedule issued. USCA case no. 10-1106. (bjrsl, ) (Entered: 05/12/2010)

RECAP
26 May 17, 2010

Transmitted Record on Appeal to US Court of Appeals re 20 Notice of Appeal by Justin Rueb. Volume Number: 1. USCA case no. 10-1106. (Attachments: # 1 Docket Sheet)(bjrsl, ) (Entered: 05/17/2010)

1 Docket Sheet

View on PACER

RECAP
27 Sept. 14, 2010

MANDATE of USCA as to 20 Notice of Appeal filed by Justin Rueb : This appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. R. 42.1. and 3.3.(B). (USCA Case No. 10-1106) (Attachments: # 1 USCA Order)(bjrsl, ) (Entered: 09/14/2010)

1 USCA Order

View on PACER

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory:

Colorado

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 5, 1981

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Inmates who petitioned to obtain contempt citations against executive director of Colorado department of corrections

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: Yes

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State

Colorado Department of Corrections

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Due Process: Substantive Due Process

Other Dockets:

District of Colorado 1:81-cv-01754

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 01-01295

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 1982 - 2002

Issues

General/Misc.:

Loss or damage to property

Recommended Citation