Angelo Gonzalez v. Ronnie Seal
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25371
| 5th Cir. | 2012Background
- Gonzalez filed a pro se in forma pauperis §1983 complaint in December 2009 against Louisiana Department of Corrections employees alleging threats, harassment, and various harms since July 2006.
- He claimed excessive use of force in July 2006 and on November 11, 2009, plus denial of medical care and due process issues from lockdown status, and state-law assault and battery.
- Gonzalez sought monetary damages and a declaratory judgment to end unconstitutional prison practices.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment contending Gonzalez did not exhaust available prison grievances before filing the federal suit.
- The district court denied the motion, and the Fifth Circuit reversed, remanding to dismiss for failure to exhaust pre-filing.
- The court held that pre-filing administrative exhaustion is mandatory under the PLRA, and Underwood v. Wilson’s discretionary exception was tacitly overruled by Woodford v. Ngo and Jones v. Bock.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Underwood remains valid after Woodford and Jones. | Underwood should still allow excusing non-exhaustion. | Woodford/Jones overruled Underwood; no discretion to excuse. | Underwood overruled; pre-filing exhaustion mandatory. |
| Whether the district court could apply an interests-of-justice exception to pre-filing exhaustion. | District court can excuse exhaustion if justice requires. | No exception; exhaustion mandatory and non-waivable. | Not reached; decision based on mandatory exhaustion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (Supreme Court 2006) (exhaustion is mandatory under the PLRA)
- Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (Supreme Court 2007) (no unexhausted claims may be heard; exhaustion mandatory)
- Underwood v. Wilson, 151 F.3d 292 (5th Cir. 1998) (discretionary exception to exhaustion allowed in rare cases)
- Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (Supreme Court 2002) (context for objective of exhaustion; internal remedies first)
- Fisher v. Halliburton, 667 F.3d 602 (5th Cir. 2012) (cited for interlocutory appeal standards)