Parks v. Coe
3:16-cv-01229
| S.D. Ill. | Apr 30, 2018Background
- Plaintiff Damon Parks, an Illinois inmate, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging deliberate indifference to his diabetic foot care while at Lawrence Correctional Center and that Wexford had a cost-driven antibiotic policy.
- Defendants: Tobey Rice (clothing room supervisor) and Wexford Health Sources, Inc. with employees John Coe and Evelyn Blanchard.
- Alleged incidents occurred May 19, 2016 (denial of diabetic shoes; vinyl shoes causing ulcers) and June 2, 2016 (medical care issues).
- Defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that Parks failed to exhaust administrative remedies. A Pavey evidentiary hearing was held.
- Magistrate Judge Daly found Parks’s grievances were filed in August 2016, beyond the 60‑day deadline in the IDOC grievance rule, and found Parks’ claims of earlier “missing” grievances not credible.
- District Judge Yandle adopted the R&R, concluding Parks failed to properly exhaust and dismissing the case without prejudice; credibility findings from the Pavey hearing were upheld.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Parks exhausted administrative remedies before filing suit | Parks contends he filed timely grievances (including two "missing" grievances within 60 days) and that some grievances went unprocessed | Defendants argue recorded grievances were filed in August 2016, beyond the 60‑day deadline, and no timely grievances on the issues exist | Court held Parks did not properly exhaust; recorded grievances were untimely and claimed missing grievances lacked credibility |
| Whether credibility findings from the Pavey hearing should be disturbed | Parks argues record evidence (e.g., counselor testimony, grievance processing) supports his account and that he was disadvantaged at the hearing | Defendants rely on the magistrate judge's credibility determinations and documentary records | Court accepted magistrate judge’s credibility assessments and declined to second‑guess them |
| Applicability of the 60‑day filing deadline under IDOC grievance rules | Parks challenges reliance on counseling summary because unprocessed or emergency grievances might not appear | Defendants say regulation requires filing within 60 days and records show no timely grievance on the issues | Court held the 60‑day rule applies and Parks did not meet it; absence of records and testimony supported that conclusion |
| Remedy for failure to exhaust | Parks implicitly seeks to proceed on merits despite exhaustion dispute | Defendants seek dismissal for failure to exhaust | Court dismissed the suit without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies |
Key Cases Cited
- Pavey v. Conley, 544 F.3d 739 (7th Cir. 2008) (authorizes evidentiary hearing on exhaustion and permits credibility findings)
- Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (2006) (exhaustion must be "proper" under prison administrative rules)
- Pozo v. McCaughtry, 286 F.3d 1022 (7th Cir. 2002) (exhaustion requires filing in place, time, and manner required by rules)
- Kraushaar v. Flanigan, 45 F.3d 1040 (7th Cir. 1995) (magistrate judge best positioned to assess witness credibility)
- Goffman v. Gross, 59 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 1995) (district court need not re‑hear to review magistrate judge credibility determinations)