Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-05044/USCOURTS-ca10-91-05044-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

' 

FILED 

Unit.eel Stat.es Court of Ap~ls 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit 

PETER J. MCMAHON, JR., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

FRANK THURMAN, Sheriff, 

Tulsa County, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

SEP O 6 1991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 91-5044 

(D.C. No. 79-C-723-B) 

( N. D. Okla. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this 

three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument 

would not be of material assistance in the determination of this 

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The 

cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

Mr. McMahon appeals prose the denial of his prose motion to 

enforce a judgment. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36 . 3. 

Appellate Case: 91-5044 Document: 010110089376 Date Filed: 09/06/1991 Page: 1 
The underlying action was filed, prose, by an inmate of the 

Tulsa County, Oklahoma jail in 1979. The district court found 

certain deficiencies existed in the jail and ordered various 

corrections. In 1987, Defendant alleged full compliance. The 

district court held an evidentiary hearing and determined the jail 

complied with constitutional standards and dismissed the action. 

Nearly three years later, in 1990, Mr. McMahon filed his pro 

se motion to enforce the earlier judgment. The district court, 

after determining that Mr. McMahon was a member of the plaintiff 

class, determined jurisdiction was lacking. The district court 

concluded that the 1987 judgment finding compliance and ordering a 

dismissal was a closure of the issues and dismissed Mr. McMahon's 

petition. 

Mr. McMahon appeals this decision prose arguing that "the 

jail operations have begun to slip back somewhat into its shadowy 

past" and urges that the district court erred "under its inherent 

powers of equity" by not reopening the case. 

We grant Mr. McMahon's request to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Mr. McMahon misperceives the law. The original action was 

dismissed in 1987 and no appeal was taken. The district court 

retained no supervisory powers nor jurisdiction over the issues 

decided. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-5044 Document: 010110089376 Date Filed: 09/06/1991 Page: 2 
We note that Appellee, Frank Thurman, is no longer Sheriff 

and, therefore, no longer a party. Furthermore, Appellant may be 

barred from proceeding as he unsuccessfully maintained a similar 

suit in state court and apparently is no longer an inmate. 

However, the basis of the district court's decision was its lack 

of jurisdiction rather than these issues. Therefore, we merely 

note the existence of these issues without deciding the merits. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

United States Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 91-5044 Document: 010110089376 Date Filed: 09/06/1991 Page: 3