Tenth Circuit· 7/12/2019

May v. Segovia

Citations

929 F.3d 1223

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that the plaintiff failed to offer any factual support for his allegation that prison officials prohibited him from filing grievances “beyond the allegation itself,” which was insufficient to demonstrate his administrative remedies were unavailable
holding the PLRA exhaustion requirement applied because the plaintiff “was a prisoner within the meaning of the PLRA when he brought his due-process claim”
explaining that “amended complaint, as the operative complaint, supersedes the original complaint’s allegations”
rejecting plaintiff’s argument that a grievance process was unavailable where plaintiff filed twenty-nine other grievances as an allegedly tampered-with grievance in the same time period
“The amended complaint, as the operative complaint, supersedes the original complaint’s allegations . . . .”
explaining defendant bears burden of proving lack of exhaustion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Briscoe, Holmes, McHUGH

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

35 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.