Chandler v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
249 F. Supp. 3d 267
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Johnny Ray Chandler, Sr., a federal inmate at ADX Florence, alleges that counselor M. Wyche refused to provide postage to mail a civil claim to D.C. Superior Court on June 9, 2016, and seeks $175,000 from Wyche and the BOP for denial of access to courts/abuse of process.
- Plaintiff submitted various BOP administrative remedy requests between June 9 and December 20, 2016; two reached the Office of General Counsel but none related to the postage/abuse-of-process claim.
- Plaintiff filed a Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) administrative claim with BOP on June 21, 2016; BOP began an investigation, the plaintiff withdrew the claim on July 21, 2016, and BOP closed the file on July 26, 2016.
- Plaintiff filed the complaint in D.C. Superior Court on July 25, 2016; defendants removed the case to federal court and certified Wyche acted within scope of employment.
- Defendants moved to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the FTCA and (alternatively) under the PLRA; plaintiff did not file a timely opposition and moved only to hold the motion in abeyance relating to confiscated legal papers.
- The court addressed the merits (despite an unopposed motion) and concluded Chandler failed to exhaust administrative remedies under both the FTCA and the PLRA and granted defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FTCA suit is barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies | Chandler filed FTCA/monetary claim in court seeking damages for denial of postage | Plaintiff filed suit before administrative claim was finally denied or six months elapsed under 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) | Dismissed: suit premature under FTCA for failure to exhaust administrative remedies |
| Whether PLRA exhaustion bars suit about prison conditions/access to courts | Chandler alleges denial of access to courts due to withholding postage | Chandler did not pursue BOP administrative remedies specific to this claim; PLRA requires proper exhaustion | Dismissed: PLRA exhaustion not satisfied; administrative process not completed |
| Whether defendants’ unopposed motion should be decided on the merits | Chandler did not timely oppose; requested abeyance only | Court may not automatically grant under local rule; must consider merits per Cohen | Court reviewed merits and dismissed on exhaustion grounds |
| Whether suit may proceed against United States employee personally | Chandler seeks damages from Wyche and BOP | Certification that Wyche acted within scope converts claim to FTCA against United States | Court treated claim as FTCA claim against the United States and applied FTCA exhaustion rules |
Key Cases Cited
- McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106 (FTCA requires exhaustion of administrative remedies before suit)
- Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (PLRA exhaustion requirement applies to prisoner claims about prison conditions)
- Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (PLRA requires proper exhaustion complying with procedural rules)
- Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (exhaustion under PLRA is an affirmative defense for defendants to plead)
- Cohen v. Board of Trustees of the Univ. of the District of Columbia, 819 F.3d 476 (courts should be cautious when granting unopposed motions under local rules)
- United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206 (sovereign immunity principles require statutory waiver to sue the United States)