William Cannon, Jr. v. Odie Washington, Director, Ronald Haws, Rodney L. Tally

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because he “ignored both of the [administrative review board’s] instructions concerning the form of his response”
• holding that a prisoner failed to exhaust when he failed to revise a grievance form to explain good cause for his untimely filing
• holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because he “ignored both of the ARB’s instructions concerning the form of his response”
• holding that a prisoner may not file a lawsuit before exhausting his administrative remedies
• concluding that an inmate may amend his complaint to include claims that were not exhausted at the time that the original complaint was filed but that are exhausted by the time that an amended complaint is filed
• noting that permitting a prisoner to sue first and then ask the prison to address issues that are the subject of pending litigation defeats the purpose of the PLRA exhaustion requirement.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).