Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Murphy Creek, LLC, et al. v. Murphy Creek Metropolitan District No. 3
Paid petition · Court of Appeals of Colorado, No. 2021CA366 · judgment April 28, 2022
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
-
Whether the Colorado Courts ignored the intent of Congress set forth in 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 and binding precedents of this Court, and erred in holding that the Petitioners were not “prevailing parties” on their 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 claim after judicial relief concerning the claim changed the legal relationship between the parties to the Petitioners’ benefit without a ruling on the merits, and whether such claim was “substantial” to support an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988?
-
Whether the Colorado Courts ignored the intent of Congress set forth in 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 and binding precedents of this Court, and erred in holding that Petitioners are not entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 on a mooted 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 claim by holding that: (a) they are not “prevailing parties” for purposes of § 1988; (b) their 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 claim was not “substantial”; and (c) the prevailing state law claims and 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 claim did not arise from a “common nucleus of operative fact”?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Kim J. Seter
Seter and Vander Wall, P.C.
For respondent
Brian Keith Matise
Burg Simpson Eldredge Hersh & Jardine, P.C.
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- May 01 2023Petition DENIED.
- Apr 12 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/28/2023.
- Apr 06 2023Waiver of right of respondent Murphy Creek Metropolitan District No. 3 to respond filed.
- Mar 13 2023Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 17, 2023)