10th Circuit Court to Hear Cases at Law School
08-2009 NM Hatten-Gonzales v. Hyde, Appellant
Reproduced below are excerpts from each brief that summarize the issues.
NM Hatten-Gonzales v. Hyde, Appellant - APPELLANT’S REPLY BRIEF
The argument is as follows: Under the plain language of the modified settlement agreement, plaintiffs' authority to conduct monitoring has long expired; Even in the District Court property considered the parties' conduct, that evidence does not support its ruling; Dismissal of the action is appropriate, at the very least, the District Court lacks jurisdiction to require additional monitoring; Modified settlement agreement should be dismissed.
NM Hatten-Gonzales v. Hyde, Appellant -
PLAINTIFFS’/APPELLEES’ ANSWER BRIEF
This is a civil rights case brought in 1988 against the Secretary of the New Mexico Human Services Department alleging that systemic problems in the application process for food stamps and Medicaid violated the federal rights of the plaintiff class. In 1990, the district court adopted as the order of the court an extensive settlement agreement negotiated by the parties (hereinafter “the Decree”), which required systemic change in the processing of food stamp and Medicaid applications statewide. The Decree’s terms were interpreted for more than 17 years by both parties and by the court to permit ongoing monitoring and oversight by the Plaintiffs to determine the extent of Defendant’s compliance with the Decree, and, if violations were found, to enforce the Decree’s terms.