Mitchell v. Horn.U.S. Appeals Court DUE PROCESS RETALIATION Mitchell v. Horn, 318 F.3d 523 (3rd Cir. 2003). A state prisoner one in confinement, or under arrest, for a political offense. See also: State brought a pro se [section] 1983 action against a corrections officer The examples and perspective in this article or section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please [ improve this article] or discuss the issue on the talk page. and other prison officials, alleging that the officer planted contraband near his locker in retaliation for complaints he filed against the officer, and that he was denied a fair hearing on the contraband charge. The district court dismissed the action and the prisoner appealed. The appeals court reversed and remanded. The appeals court held that the prisoner lacked available remedies for meeting the administrative exhaustion requirement of the Prison Litigation An action brought in court to enforce a particular right. The act or process of bringing a lawsuit in and of itself; a judicial contest; any dispute. When a person begins a civil lawsuit, the person enters into a process called litigation. Reform Act (PLRA PLRA Partido Liberal Radical Autentico (Paraguay) PLRA Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ) because prison officials refused to provide him with the necessary grievance forms. The appeals court found that the prisoner stated a claim for retaliation under the First Amendment. (Graterford Correctional Institution, Pennsylvania) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion