Case Citator › Jernigan v. Stuchell

Jernigan v. Stuchell

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Criticized by some courts
Court
Tenth Circuit
Citation
304 F.3d 1030
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
39 of 39
Citing cases (total)
39
Treatment dates
2005
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. Jernigan v. Stuchell continues to be followed for its rule that a prisoner must complete available grievance procedures before filing suit. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals called its separate rule about unanswered grievances unpersuasive, but expressly left that statutory question undecided.
More on how this was screened

That criticism is listed below. All 39 flagged citations have been read.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

39 later cases cite Jernigan v. Stuchell; 39 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Jernigan v. Stuchell?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Criticized

  • The court found Jernigan's rule that an unanswered grievance can make administrative remedies unavailable unpersuasive, while expressly declining to decide that statutory question.

    Artis-Bey v. District of Columbia · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · filed

    ... the Tenth Circuit has held “that the failure [of a correctional facility] to respond to a grievance within the time limits contained in the grievance policy renders an administrative remedy unavailable,” and relieves the inmate of the PLRA’s burden to exhaust it. Jemigan v. Stuchell, 304 F.3d 1030, 1032 (10th Cir.2002) ... That statutory argument has not been pressed by the parties, and we do not decide it. It is unpersuasive, however, in light of our interpretation of the IGP as permitting (though not requiring) the inmate to continue to appeal in the face of the institution’s non-response.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Jernigan v. Stuchell and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace