Citizen Center v. Gessler et al, No. 1:2012cv00370 - Document 142 (D. Colo. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER granting 141 Motion for Clarification of Final Judgment: this case has been dismissed in its entirety, by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 11/27/12.(dkals, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Citizen Center v. Gessler et al Doc. 142 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello Civil Action No. 12-cv-00370-CMA-MJW CITIZEN CENTER, a Colorado nonprofit corporation, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT GESSLER, in his official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State, SHEILA REINER, in her official capacity as Mesa County Clerk & Recorder, SCOTT DOYLE, in his official capacity as Larimer County Clerk & Recorder, PAM ANDERSON, in her official capacity as Jefferson County Clerk & Recorder, HILLARY HALL, in her official capacity as Boulder County Clerk & Recorder, JOYCE RENO, in her official capacity as Chaffee County Clerk & Recorder, and TEAK SIMONTON, in her official capacity as Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, Defendants. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CLARIFY This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification of Final Judgment. (Doc. # 141.) Essentially, Plaintiff seeks assurance from this Court that the Final Judgment (Doc. # 118) entered in this case “is, in fact, a final judgment subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.” (Doc. # 141 at 4.) Plaintiff’s concern stems from the absence of an explicit mention of its First Supplemental Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Doc. # 88) in: this Court’s September 21, 2012 oral ruling (see Doc. # 125 at 30); the minute entry that followed the Court’s ruling (Doc. # 117); or the Final Judgment entered on September 25, 2012 (Doc. # 118). As Plaintiff notes, however, all three docket entries state that the case was dismissed in its entirety. Moreover, and to quell Plaintiff’s lingering concern, Dockets.Justia.com the Court notes that its ruling – and, thus, the subsequent docket entries – encompass Plaintiff’s First Supplemental Complaint, which the Court considered, along with all of the other filings in this case, before issuing its ruling. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification of Final Judgment (Doc. # 141) is GRANTED, and the Final Judgment is hereby CLARIFIED so that the parties, and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, are aware that this case truly has been DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. DATED: November 27 , 2012 BY THE COURT: _______________________________ CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District Judge 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.
