Summary
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana grants Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in Timothy Scott Morrow, Jr.’s Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect action. The court concludes that Morrow failed to exhaust available administrative remedies before filing suit and directs the Clerk to enter final judgment for the Defendants.
Holdings
- Defendants were entitled to summary judgment because the undisputed evidence showed that Morrow did not fully exhaust available administrative remedies before filing suit.
- Summary judgment was procedurally proper because Morrow failed to respond to Defendants' properly supported motion, permitting the court to treat Defendants' factual assertions as undisputed under Rule 56(e).
Questions Presented
- Whether Defendants were entitled to summary judgment because Morrow failed to exhaust available administrative remedies before filing his prison-conditions action.
- Whether the undisputed record established that Morrow's grievance was properly rejected and that no relevant administrative remedy was completed or shown to be unavailable.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (9)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986)(followed)
- Heft v. Moore, 351 F.3d 278, 282 (7th Cir. 2003)(followed)
- Goodman v. National Security Agency, Inc., 621 F.3d 651, 654 (7th Cir. 2010)(followed)
- Perez v. Wisconsin Department of Corrections, 182 F.3d 532, 535 (7th Cir. 1999)(followed)
- King v. McCarty, 781 F.3d 889, 893 (7th Cir. 2015)(followed)
- Lockett v. Bonson, 937 F.3d 1016, 1025 (7th Cir. 2019)(followed)
- Dole v. Chandler, 438 F.3d 804, 809 (7th Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Pozo v. McCaughtry, 286 F.3d 1022, 1025 (7th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Kaba v. Stepp, 458 F.3d 678, 684 (7th Cir. 2006)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…