Clay v. Schnurr, 123720

Inmate Criss Clay filed a K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-1501 petition on Aug. 31, 2020 alleging corrections officers illegally strip-searched him.
He attached an inmate grievance dated July 22, 2020 signed by Clay but with no receipt or date showing prison officials received it.
Warden Dan Schnurr moved to dismiss, arguing Clay failed to number factual assertions and did not show exhaustion of administrative remedies.
The district court held a nonevidentiary hearing on Sept. 23, 2020 and dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim and for failure to allege/prove exhaustion.
After appeal was docketed, Schnurr notified the court that Clay was released to postrelease supervision on Oct. 30, 2020; both parties agreed Clay was no longer incarcerated.
The appellate court concluded the appeal was moot and dismissed it, citing the prohibition on advisory opinions and the fact-specific nature of exhaustion disputes.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether petition states a K.S.A. 60-1501 claim (shocking, intolerable conduct)	Clay: alleged illegal strip search amounted to constitutional mistreatment	Schnurr: petition failed the "shocking and intolerable" standard and was procedurally defective	Dismissed for failure to state a claim
Whether Clay exhausted administrative remedies before filing	Clay: prison officials prevented exhaustion (grievance submitted)	Schnurr: no proof grievance was received; Clay did not establish exhaustion in the petition	Dismissed for failure to allege/prove exhaustion
Whether appeal is moot after Clay's release	Clay: issue could recur and affect other inmates or himself if re-incarcerated	Schnurr: release renders the appeal moot; no live controversy	Appeal dismissed as moot; court declined to issue advisory opinion

Johnson v. State, 289 Kan. 642 (2009) (defines K.S.A. 60-1501 standard for shocking or intolerable constitutional misconduct)
Shipe v. Public Wholesale Water Supply Dist. No. 25, 289 Kan. 160 (2009) (courts must avoid issuing advisory opinions)
State ex rel. Morrison v. Sebelius, 285 Kan. 875 (2008) (same; limits on advisory relief)
State v. Roat, 311 Kan. 581 (2020) (mootness analysis: appellate judgment must have meaningful consequences)