John Thompson v. Harry Connick, et al, No. 10-30035 (5th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 10-30035 Document: 00511482252 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-30035 May 18, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JOHN THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus HARRY F. CONNICK, in His Official Capacity as District Attorney and in His Individual Capacity; ERIC DUBELIER, in His Official Capacity as Assistant District Attorney; JAMES WILLIAMS, in His Official Capacity as Assistant District Attorney; EDDIE JORDAN, in His Official Capacity as District Attorney; ORLEANS PARISH DISTRICT ATTORNEY S OFFICE, Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:03-CV-2045 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The defendants challenge an award of supplemental attorney s fees and * Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R. 47.5.4. Case: 10-30035 Document: 00511482252 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/18/2011 No. 10-30035 costs. In Connick v. Thompson, 131 S. Ct. 1350 (2011), the Court reversed this court s affirmance, see Thompson v. Connick, 578 F.3d 293 (5th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (per curiam) (affirming by equally divided court), of the district court s award of damages and fees. The parties have submitted letter briefs, on request, and agree that the award of supplemental fees should be reversed. This court has now remanded the underlying action for entry of judgment. See Thompson v. Connick, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 9758 (5th Cir. May 13, 2011) (en banc) (per curiam). The award of supplemental fees and costs is therefore REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings, if any, that may be required. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.