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.

Kristen Sagar - 03/31/2006
Kevin Nomura - 03/09/2015


compress summary