Ronnel Fitzgerald v. Paula Lampe et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin considers whether Ronnel Fitzgerald exhausted administrative remedies for retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court grants summary judgment to Lampe, Patt, Sitzman, and Ryan because Fitzgerald’s inmate complaints did not notify the institution of the alleged retaliation based on prior protected activity. The court denies summary judgment as to Haynes, finding that one inmate complaint provided adequate notice of the alleged retaliatory conduct.

Holdings

1. Fitzgerald failed to exhaust available administrative remedies because his inmate complaints did not notify the institution that the alleged medical-appointment misconduct was undertaken in retaliation for his prior protected activity.
2. Fitzgerald exhausted his retaliation claim against Haynes because inmate complaint DCI-2022-7147 notified the institution that Haynes allegedly acted improperly at the disciplinary hearing because Fitzgerald had previously submitted complaints about Haynes and the department he supervised.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Fitzgerald exhausted available administrative remedies for his retaliation claims against Lampe, Patt, Sitzman, and Ryan by filing inmate complaints that notified the institution that the alleged medical-appointment misconduct was motivated by his prior protected activity.
2. Whether inmate complaint DCI-2022-7147 exhausted Fitzgerald's retaliation claim against Haynes by notifying the institution that Haynes's conduct at the disciplinary hearing was motivated by Fitzgerald's prior complaints.

Disposition

other