Fleming v. Gutierrez
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7445
10th Cir.2015Background
- 2012 Sandoval County election experienced long lines, wait times, and crowding at polling places.
- District court found election procedures dysfunctional and issued a preliminary injunction expanding voting centers and machines for 2014.
- County sought interlocutory review; the appeal was initially denied before the 2014 election.
- Election occurred under the injunction; voters sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for equal protection, due process, and state constitution claims.
- District court order stated it would apply through the November 2014 election; post-election, parties questioned mootness and prevailing-party status for attorney’s fees.
- The appellate court ultimately held the appeal moot due to passage of the election and lack of live relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the interlocutory appeal moot after the election? | Voters contend mootness due to passage of the 2014 election. | County argues exception for repetition yet evading review saves the appeal. | Yes, moot; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. |
| Does the repetition yet evading review exception apply to this interlocutory appeal? | Voters maintain exception may preserve justiciability. | County contends exception applies due to potential repeat elections. | No, exception does not save the appeal; mootness controls here. |
| Should the district court’s injunction be vacated or the appeal simply dismissed? | Voters request dismissal without vacating the injunction order. | County asks for relief consistent with mootness; vacatur unnecessary. | Adopted usual practice: dismiss the appeal as moot without vacating the injunction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chihuahuan Grasslands Alliance v. Kempthorne, 545 F.3d 884 (10th Cir. 2008) (mootness threshold; live controversy required)
- Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Bureau of Reclamation, 601 F.3d 1096 (10th Cir. 2010) (mootness and effectual relief inquiry)
- Stevenson v. Blytheville Sch. Dist. No. 5, 762 F.3d 765 (8th Cir. 2014) (mootness when relief cannot be granted in real world)
- Thournir v. Buchanan, 710 F.2d 1461 (10th Cir. 1983) (interlocutory appeal moot when election passed)
- Independence Party of Richmond County v. Graham, 413 F.3d 252 (2d Cir. 2005) (capable of repetition yet evading review; election mootness example)
- Stone v. Bd. of Election Comm'rs, 643 F.3d 543 (7th Cir. 2011) (mootness when election completed; interlocutory appeal dismissed)
- Gjertsen v. Bd. of Election Comm'rs, 751 F.2d 199 (7th Cir. 1984) (interlocutory mootness and continuing district court action)
- Kan. Judicial Watch v. Stout, 653 F.3d 1230 (10th Cir. 2011) (prevailing party status and attorney’s fees considerations)
- Dahlem v. Bd. of Educ. of Denver Pub. Schs., 901 F.2d 1508 (10th Cir. 1990) (fee petitions and mootness related to underlying claims)