Paul Redd, Jr. v. Michael Daley ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                              FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              DEC 20 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    PAUL A. REDD, Jr.,                               No. 09-17164
    Plaintiff - Appellant,             D.C. No. 5:98-cv-20429-JF
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    MICHAEL D. DALEY,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of California
    Jeremy D. Fogel, District Judge, Presiding
    Argued and Submitted December 8, 2010
    San Francisco, California
    Before: HUG, D.W. NELSON, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
    Paul Redd, Jr. (“Redd”), a prisoner currently in the custody of the California
    Department of Corrections (“CDC”), appeals the dismissal of his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    claim against CDC Correctional Officer Michael Daley for failure to exhaust
    administrative remedies, as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) of the Prison
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”). We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    .
    We reverse and remand for further proceedings. We review de novo the district
    court’s determination that a prisoner failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
    O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr. Ctr., 
    502 F.3d 1056
    , 1059 (9th Cir. 2007).
    The district court dismissed Redd’s excessive force claim for failure to
    exhaust because Redd did not assert in his prison grievance that Daley used
    excessive force. However, where prison grievance rules do not set forth a level of
    factual specificity – as is the case here – this court has held that a prisoner must
    simply notify the prison of the “nature of the wrong for which redress is sought.”
    Griffin v. Arpaio, 
    557 F.3d 1117
    , 1120 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Strong v. David,
    
    297 F.3d 646
    , 650 (7th Cir. 2002)). Here, Redd’s grievance addresses the incident
    with Daley and strongly suggests that Daley’s actions were intentional. The
    grievance does not explicitly set forth the elements of the claim, but it sufficiently
    informs the prison of the nature of the wrong. Thus, Redd has exhausted his
    administrative remedies with respect to the excessive force claim.
    We remand for consideration of the excessive force claim.
    REVERSED and REMANDED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-17164

Judges: Hug, Nelson, McKeown

Filed Date: 12/20/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024