Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Joseph W. Higgins v. Louis D. Rovira, Mac Danford, Nicholas R. Massaro, Adam Gollin, Thomas M. Deister, Judy Myers, David Wooley, Donice Neal, R.W. Essert, Jerry Sylvia, C.E. Donley, J. Poole, and John Hadely, All in Their Individual Capacities
Citations: 30 F.3d 141; 1994 WL 385138Docket: 94-1085
Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; July 15, 1994; Federal Appellate Court
Joseph W. Higgins, a prisoner at the Colorado State Penitentiary, filed a civil rights complaint that was interpreted by the magistrate and district court as a request for a writ of habeas corpus. The magistrate recommended dismissal of the action, which the district court adopted, citing that Higgins did not file objections to the recommendation. Higgins appealed, asserting that he did file objections, which entitled him to de novo review by the district court. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the appellate record and confirmed that Higgins had indeed filed objections on January 1, 1994. The court concluded that the district court had mistakenly stated that no objections were filed and failed to provide the required de novo review. As a result, the appellate court vacated the district court's decision and remanded the case for further review, specifically instructing the court to consider the assertion by the Appellees regarding proper service and party status. Higgins' motions to prohibit the Attorney General's participation and to enforce an injunction were denied. The order specifies that it is not binding precedent except under specific legal doctrines, and its citation is subject to the court's General Order from November 29, 1993.