Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02285/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02285-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

1

The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin

 L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2285

___________

Clarence H. Nash, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Harley G. Lappin, Sued as Harley B. *

Lappin; Harold Watts; G. L. * [UNPUBLISHED]

Hershberger, Sued as Gerald *

Hershberger; W. I. LeBlanc, Sued as *

Whitney I. LeBlance, Jr.; David *

Good; David Edwardy, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 30, 2006

Filed: March 30, 2006

___________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Clarence Nash, an inmate at the Federal Medical Center (FMC), appeals the

district court’s1

 preservice dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to

exhaust administrative remedies. 

Appellate Case: 05-2285 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2006 Entry ID: 2027130
-2-

While the exhaustion requirement is an affirmative defense that a defendant

must plead and prove, see Nerness v. Johnson, 401 F.3d 874, 876 (8th Cir. 2005) (per

curiam), it is clear from the dates of the alleged incidents that Nash could not have

administratively exhausted all of his claims when he filed the instant lawsuit, cf.

Myers v. Vogal, 960 F.2d 750, 751 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (while statute of

limitations is affirmative defense, district court may properly dismiss in forma

pauperis complaint before service when it is apparent from face of complaint that

statute of limitations has run). Accordingly, we affirm but modify the dismissal to be

without prejudice. See Calico Trailer Mfg. Co. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 155 F.3d 976,

978 (8th Cir. 1998) (modifying dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative

remedies to be dismissal without prejudice).

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-2285 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/30/2006 Entry ID: 2027130