McAlphin v. Morgan, CO-
| Decision Date | 28 June 2000 |
| Docket Number | CO-,No. 99-4112,M,99-4112 |
| Citation | 216 F.3d 680 |
| Parties | (8th Cir. 2000) James McAlphin, Appellant, v. R. Morgan, Warden, Tucker Maximum Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; G. Harmon, Warden, Tucker Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Mr. McIntosh, Classification Officer, Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; R. Wimberly, Major, Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Sergeant M. Bell, Tucker Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; State Investigator Davis; K. Waddle, Grievance Officer, Tucker Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; T. Mayo,aximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Peterson,aximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction; Keith Crockett, Sergeant, Tucker Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction, originally sued as Crockett; Tonya Forrest,aximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction, originally sued as Forrest; David Knott, Sergeant, Maximum Security Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction, originally sued as Knott, Appellees. Submitted: |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, FAGG and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges.
Prisoner James McAlphin appeals the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. 1983 action in which McAlphin alleges various Arkansas Department of Corrections employees (collectively the defendants) violated McAlphin's constitutional rights by, among other things, forcing him to assault other inmates, improperly placing him in punitive isolation and administrative segregation, assaulting him, and improperly classifying him. The district court dismissed McAlphin's complaint without prejudice and denied McAlphin's motions for leave to file an amended complaint, for preliminary injunction, and for a default judgment against defendants Davis and Wimberly.
On appeal, McAlphin contends the district court improperly dismissed his complaint after concluding McAlphin failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing his 1983 action as required by 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a) (Supp. III 1997). Although McAlphin has submitted to this court evidence indicating that his administrative remedies as to at least one of his claims may have indeed been exhausted before he filed his 1983 action, McAlphin neither attached this evidence to his 1983 complaint nor alleged full exhaustion in his complaint. See Brown v. Toombs, 139...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Connor v. Ault, No. C01-4123-MWB (N.D. Iowa 8/6/2003)
...complaint the administrative decision, if it is available, showing the disposition of his or her claim or grievance. McAlphin v. Morgan, 216 F.3d 680, 682 (8th Cir. 2000) (citing Brown v. Toombs, 139 F.3d 1102, 1104 (6th Cir. 1998)). See also Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 733-34, 121 S.Ct......
-
Ray v. Kertes
...White v. Fauver, 19 F.Supp.2d 305, 312 (D.N.J.1998). 7. The position of the Eighth Circuit is not clearly defined. In McAlphin v. Morgan, 216 F.3d 680, 682 (8th Cir.2000), the court, after citing Brown, dismissed the prisoner's complaint, noting he failed to attach evidence of exhaustion. S......
-
Archuleta v. Hedrick
...issues, this was both helpful and appropriate. See Foulk v. Charrier, 262 F.3d 687, 698 n. 7 (8th Cir.2001); McAlphin v. Morgan, 216 F.3d 680, 682 (8th Cir.2000). For the following reasons, we vacate the dismissal order and remand to the district court with directions to transfer the case t......
-
Hardin v. Fullenkamp, Civil No: 4-99-CV-80723 (S.D. Iowa 6/22/2001)
...266 (2000). Hardin bears the initial burden of showing that he exhausted available administrative remedies. Cf. McAlphin v. Morgan, 216 F.3d 680, 682 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (to satisfy § 1997e(a)'s requirements, inmate must allege exhaustion of available administrative remedies and sh......