Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-6_05-cv-06087/USCOURTS-arwd-6_05-cv-06087-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jonak
Defendant
Boyce Price
Plaintiff
Dream Young
Defendant

Document Text:

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

HOT SPRINGS DIVISION

BOYCE PRICE PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 05-6087

 

DREAM YOUNG, Administrator, 

Ouachita River Correctional Unit Infirmary;

and DR. JONAK, Ouachita River

Correctional Unit Infirmary DEFENDANTS

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On February 2, 2006, separate defendant Dream Redic-Young filed a motion to dismiss

(Doc. 16). By order entered on February 16, 2006, the plaintiff, Boyce Price, was directed to

complete, sign, and return a questionnaire that would serve as his response to the motion to

dismiss (Doc. 18). 

Plaintiff responded to the motion to dismiss on March 6, 2006 (Doc. 19). Plaintiff,

however, did not respond to the questionnaire propounded by the court. The motion to dismiss

is before the undersigned for issuance of this report and recommendation.

BACKGROUND

Price is currently incarcerated by the Arkansas Department of Correction at the Ouachita

River Correctional Unit. He filed this lawsuit contending he has been refused proper medical

attention. Specifically, he contends that since March of 2005 he has had pain in his right side

that moves down his right buttock into his right calf. He indicates his right leg swells up. 

Case 6:05-cv-06087-RTD Document 22 Filed 05/16/06 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-2-

Price maintains his medical status is M-2 which he states means he should not be

required to engage in physical labor. Despite this, Price states he has been required to work up

to four hours per day. 

Price attached to his complaint a grievance 0R-05-00150. The grievance contains the

warden’s/center supervisor’s decision. The decision is dated September 28, 2005. The decision

states that it has been determined the grievance is a medical matter and it has been forwarded to

the medical administrator for written response and/or interview within twenty days. If Price

receives no response, or believes the response received is unsatisfactory, he is advised that he

may appeal to the Deputy Director of Health and Correctional programs. There is also a space

on the form for the inmate to write in his appeal if he disagrees with the response and sign and

date the form. 

Also attached to the complaint is a CMS grievance response signed by Dream Redic

Young and dated September 30, 2005. This response states:

After reviewing your medical record, I have determined that you were seen in

nurse sick call on September 1, 2005 for your leg pain and referred to the unit

physician. You were seen by the unit physician on September 7, 2005,

medication was prescribed for your pain along with heat treatments. It is very

important that you follow the physician orders. You have received appropriate

medical care. If you continue to have problems please follow the sick call

process. 

John Byus, is the Administrator of Health Services for the Arkansas Department of

Correction. Defendant’s Exhibit A. He indicates the Deputy Director for Health and

Correctional Programs, Max Mobley, had retired. Id. at ¶ 2. The deputy director job duties

include responding to health related grievances. Id. Specifically, Byus indicates inmate

Case 6:05-cv-06087-RTD Document 22 Filed 05/16/06 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-3-

grievance appeals and responses byCorrectional Medial Services are reviewed. Id. at ¶ 3. Byus

states there is no record of Price appealing the grievance response. Id. at ¶ 4.

DISCUSSION

Separate defendant Dream Redic Young has moved to dismiss the case contending that

Price has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. She points out that Price does

not mention her anywhere in the complaint. Instead, she states Price only alleges that he

disagrees with the medical treatment he has received. Ms. Young also contends Price has failed

to exhaust his administrative procedures. 

As amended by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a)

mandates exhaustion of available administrative remedies before an inmate files suit. Section

1997e(a) provides: “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under section

1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other

correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” 

The Supreme Court in Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 738-39, 121 S. Ct. 1819, 149 L.

Ed. 2d 958 (2001) held that “exhaustion is required where administrative remedies are available

even if the available administrative remedies do not provide the precise, or full, relief sought.”

Walker v. Maschner, 270 F.3d 573, 577 (8th Cir. 2001). It rejected the idea that the PLRA

allowed for a futility exception. Booth, 532 U.S. at 740-41. 

Further, the term “administrative remedies” has been held to encompass remedies not

promulgated by an administrative agency. Concepcion v. Morton, 306 F.3d 1347, 1352 (3d Cir.

2002). Specifically, it has been held that a grievance procedure contained in a handbook

constitutes an available administrative remedy within the meaning of § 1997e(a). Conception,

Case 6:05-cv-06087-RTD Document 22 Filed 05/16/06 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-4-

306 F.3d at 1352. When all claims have not been exhausted, the case is subject to dismissal.

Kozohorsky v. Harmon, 332 F.3d 1141 (8th Cir. 2003)(total exhaustion required); Jones v.

Norris, 310 F.3d 610, 612 (8th Cir. 2002); Graves v. Norris, 218 F.3d 884, 885 (8th Cir. 2000).

In this case, Price agrees that he did not exhaust his administrative remedies, Resp. (Doc.

19) at ¶ 1. However, he contends this failure should be excused because the warden did not

provide him the name of the acting deputy director. Id. Plaintiff states that to the best of his

knowledge Dr. Max Mobley had retired and Price asserts he had no idea of a final step beyond

Ms. Young. He asks the court to excuse his failure to exhaust because of his belief it would be

futile.

This we cannot do. Price clearly knew there was anotherstep in the grievance procedure.

He made no attempt to utilize the step or appeal the decision. As noted above, exhaustion is

clearly a prerequisite to an inmate asserting a civil rights claim alleging specific acts of

unconstitutional conduct by prison officials. Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 122 S. Ct. 983, 152

L. Ed. 2d 12 (2002). We therefore have no choice but to dismiss this action. Graves v. Norris,

218 F.3d 884, 885-86 (8th Cir. 2000). 

CONCLUSION

I therefore recommend that defendant’s motion to dismiss be granted as the plaintiff has

failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Price may, of course, file another lawsuit

regarding his claim that he is being denied proper medical care after he has exhausted his

administrative remedies. 

The parties have ten days from receipt of the report and recommendation in which

to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely

Case 6:05-cv-06087-RTD Document 22 Filed 05/16/06 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-5-

objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties are

reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the

district court.

DATED this 16th day of May 2006.

/s/ Bobby E. Shepherd 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 6:05-cv-06087-RTD Document 22 Filed 05/16/06 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: <pageID>