Baldauf v. Garoutte, 100208 FED10, 07-1452

Docket Nº:07-1452
Party Name:LEONARD BALDAUF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FRANCES GAROUTTE; EUGENE E. ATHERTON; JOHN STONER; STEVE SCHUH; CATHY SLACK; VICKY RIDDLE; MIKE ARELLANO; ED GILLESPIE; DONALD MCCALL; GLORIA BREIDENBACH; GARY PITTMAN; MIKE WEBB; GERALD KNAPIC; JOSEPH WILLIAM SIMS; DANIEL GALLAGHER; DAVE LINAM; KARRY PAINE; WILLIAM BEARD; JAMES HALSTEAD; H. BENNETT; CHARLES
Case Date:October 02, 2008
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

LEONARD BALDAUF, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

FRANCES GAROUTTE; EUGENE E. ATHERTON; JOHN STONER; STEVE SCHUH; CATHY SLACK; VICKY RIDDLE; MIKE ARELLANO; ED GILLESPIE; DONALD MCCALL; GLORIA BREIDENBACH; GARY PITTMAN; MIKE WEBB; GERALD KNAPIC; JOSEPH WILLIAM SIMS; DANIEL GALLAGHER; DAVE LINAM; KARRY PAINE; WILLIAM BEARD; JAMES HALSTEAD; H. BENNETT; CHARLES SHANNON; TOM MARTIN; ELIAS RINCON; RON LEYBA; JOHN HADLEY; ROBERT STOCKMAN; GABE HERNANDEZ; SEAN PRUITT; PAM KING; MATT GOODWIN; JERRY AWMILLER; RHONDA CORETTI; TERESA REYNOLDS; DINEEN CRANDALL; RICHARD FLORES; WESS LEHMAN; JULIAN PADILLA; CHRIS STARCER; GALE GRAHAM; CHRISTIAN SNELSON; DAVID SCHLOTTERER; WERMER; SCAVARDA; LUSK; BELL; CAREY; DECLUSIN; CORTEZ; E. MILLER; JOE ORTIZ; LARRY REID; MORA; RICHARD WRIGHT; DAN FOSTER; THOMAS; AVANT; JAMES MICHAUD; DON LAWSON; ZANDER; OWENS; PHILIPS; BOB FLORES; AMY HOUGH; BRAD ROCKWELL; CATHY HOLST, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 07-1452

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

October 2, 2008

D.C. No. 1:03-CV-01104-REB-CBS D. Colo.

Before TACHA, PORFILIO, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT[*]

Deanell Reece Tacha Circuit Judge

This is an appeal after remand of plaintiff-appellant Leonard Baldauf's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights case. The district court dismissed the § 1983 action because of Baldauf's "failures to comply adequately with 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and the court's orders regarding partial filing fee payments." R. Vol. II, doc. 237 at 2. Baldauf, appearing pro se, argues that 1) his motion for default should have been granted; 2) his failure to pay the filing fee was the fault of his custodian, the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC); 3) the district court improperly treated his request for counsel as a request for private counsel when, in fact, Baldauf requested an interim appointment of class counsel pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g); and 4) exhaustion should not bar his claims. Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review dismissal for failure to comply with court orders for abuse of discretion, Cosby v. Meadors, 351 F.3d 1324, 1326 (10th Cir. 2003). Having found no such abuse, we affirm.

As mentioned above, Baldauf argues that CDOC failed to make payments on his behalf. That argument is foreclosed by Cosby, 351 F.3d at 1332 (refusing to excuse prisoner's failure to pay on this ground because "it was still Plaintiff's obligation to notice...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP