ILNews

Administrative remedies must be exhausted

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Prisoners who file suits for damages before exhausting all administrative remedies are not entitled to a jury trial to debate factual issues relating to the exhaustion under the Seventh Amendment, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The opinion outlines the steps a U.S. District Court judge should take to determine whether a suit may go to trial.

The federal appellate court overturned the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division's ruling in the case Christopher Pavey v. Patrick Conley, et al., No. 07-1426. Pavey filed a suit under the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act against guards he claimed broke his arm using excessive force to remove him from his cell.

The defendants argued Pavey failed to exhaust all his administrative remedies prior to filing the suit. Pavey countered he couldn't use those remedies because his left arm was broken and he is left-handed and unable to write, and that he was transferred to another prison before an investigation was conducted.

Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, actions can't be brought under federal law until all administrative remedies available are exhausted. Trying the merits before exhaustion is unsatisfactory because it would thwart Congress' effort to bar trials of prisoner cases before the prisoner has used all administrative remedies, wrote Judge Posner.

As a result, a jury may decide the merits of a case that never should have gotten to that stage because a judge should have found the prisoner had failed to use all available administrative remedies.

The 7th Circuit decision outlines a sequence to be followed in contested exhaustion cases: first, a U.S. District Court judge conducts a hearing on exhaustion and allows discovery only related to exhaustion; next, if the judge decides the prisoner didn't exhaust all remedies, then the plaintiff can attempt to exhaust the available remedies.

If the plaintiff exhausted all remedies, but the failure to exhaust was innocent, such as the plaintiff was presented by prison officials to proceed, he would be allowed to go back and exhaust. If the failure to exhaust is the prisoner's fault, then the case is over, Judge Posner wrote.

Finally, if a U.S. District Court judge determines the plaintiff has correctly exhausted all remedies, the case can proceed to pretrial discovery and possibly a trial on the merits. The jury wouldn't be bound by any findings made previously by the judge during the exhaustion proceedings.

"We emphasize that discovery with respect to the merits must not be begun until the issue of exhaustion is resolved. If merits discovery is allowed to begin before that resolution, the statutory goal of sparing federal courts the burden of prisoner litigation until and unless the prisoner has exhausted his administrative remedies will be thwarted," he wrote.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

  2. Access to the court (judiciary branch of government) is the REAL problem, NOT necessarily lack of access to an attorney. Unfortunately, I've lived in a legal and financial hell for the past six years due to a divorce (where I was, supposedly, represented by an attorney) in which I was defrauded of settlement and the other party (and helpers) enriched through the fraud. When I attempted to introduce evidence and testify (pro se) in a foreclosure/eviction, I was silenced (apparently on procedural grounds, as research I've done since indicates). I was thrown out of a residence which was to be sold, by a judge who refused to allow me to speak in (the supposedly "informal") small claims court where the eviction proceeding (by ex-brother-in-law) was held. Six years and I can't even get back on solid or stable ground ... having bank account seized twice, unlawfully ... and now, for the past year, being dragged into court - again, contrary to law and appellate decisions - by former attorney, who is trying to force payment from exempt funds. Friday will mark fifth appearance. Hopefully, I'll be allowed to speak. The situation I find myself in shouldn't even be possible, much less dragging out with no end in sight, for years. I've done nothing wrong, but am watching a lot of wrong being accomplished under court jurisdiction; only because I was married to someone who wanted and was granted a divorce (but was not willing to assume the responsibilities that come with granting the divorce). In fact, the recalcitrant party was enriched by well over $100k, although it was necessarily split with other actors. Pro bono help? It's a nice dream ... but that's all it is, for too many. Meanwhile, injustice marches on.

  3. Both sites mentioned in the article appear to be nonfunctional to date (March 28, 2017). http://indianalegalanswers.org/ returns a message stating the "server is taking too long to respond" and http://www.abafreelegalasnswers.org/ "can't find the server". Although this does not surprise me, it is disheartening to know that access to the judicial branch of government remains out of reach for too many citizens (for procedural rather than meritorious reasons) of Indiana. Any updates regarding this story?

  4. I've been denied I appeal court date took a year my court date was Nov 9,2016 and have not received a answer yet

  5. Warsaw indiana dcs lying on our case. We already proved that in our first and most recent court appearance i need people to contact me who have evidence of dcs malpractice please email or facebook nathaniel hollett thank you

ADVERTISEMENT