Parzyck v. Prison Health Services, Inc.
627 F.3d 1215
11th Cir.2010Background
- Parzyck, a Florida prisoner, filed a pro se §1983 complaint alleging deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
- Dr. Cherry, as Chief Health Officer, was named in the third amended complaint for denying an orthopedic consultation.
- FDOC grievance procedures require informal, formal, and secretary appeals; medical complaints may omit the informal step.
- Parzyck pursued multiple FDOC grievances and appeals between 2006 and 2008 addressing orthopedic referrals.
- The district court dismissed for failure to exhaust; the Eleventh Circuit reversed, finding exhaustion satisfied.
- Court held Parzyck exhausted remedies before filing the original federal complaint, and remanded for merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Parzyck exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit? | Parzyck exhausted by completing FDOC procedures and alerts on ongoing issue. | First grievance predated Cherry's role; second grievance completed after complaint filed, not exhausted. | Yes; exhaustion satisfied; remanded for merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731 (2001) (exhaustion required before suit)
- Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (2006) (exhaustion is proper if available through procedures)
- Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007) (no requirement to name particular defendants in grievance)
- Brown v. Sikes, 212 F.3d 1205 (2000) (prisoner not required to do more than reasonably possible to exhaust)
- Howard v. Waide, 534 F.3d 1227 (2008) (grievances on same continuing issue need not be refiled)
- Johnson v. Johnson, 385 F.3d 503 (2004) (procedural requirements focus on notice to prison officials, not individual defendants)