Kansas v. Colorado

498 U.S. 933
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedOctober 29, 1990
DocketNo. 105
StatusPublished

This text of 498 U.S. 933 (Kansas v. Colorado) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kansas v. Colorado, 498 U.S. 933 (1990).

Opinion

Motion of the Special Master for interim fees and expenses granted, and the Special [934]*934Master is awarded $75,973.75 for the period November 1, 1989, through September 16, 1990, to be paid by the parties as follows: 40 percent by Kansas, 40 percent by Colorado, and 20 percent by the United States.

[For earlier order herein, see, e. g., 493 U. S. 989.]

Justice Blackmun.

It seems to me that some aspects of the fees and expenses now requested by the Special Master come close — if they do not exceed — the limits of allowability. See the dissents in Louisiana v. Mississippi, 466 U. S. 921 and 923 (1984), and Texas v. New Mexico, 475 U. S. 1004 (1986). As was there pointed out, fees and expenses charged by a Special Master, when allowed by this Court, represent our assurance to the parties that the charges are reasonable and proper. A party’s consent to the allowance of fees and expenses does not absolve this Court of its duty to make that determination. With a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the Court’s present order allowing fees and expenses that appear to be escalating in this case as to both amounts and personnel, inasmuch as no party has noted an objection on this particular occasion, I do not yet formally dissent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Texas v. New Mexico
475 U.S. 1004 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Louisiana v. Mississippi
466 U.S. 921 (Supreme Court, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
498 U.S. 933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kansas-v-colorado-scotus-1990.