Daniels

Daniels v. California Department of Corrections

Good Law
123 F. App'x 293
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 2005No. 04-16550; D.C. No. CV-03-04835-CRBCalifornia332 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

California state prisoner Clarence Roy Daniels brought a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against prison doctors. Daniels alleges that the doctors were deliberately indifferent for over one year to his pleas for medical care for his continuing throat pain. Upon being transferred to another prison, Daniels was diagnosed with throat cancer *294 and his voice box, part of his tongue and neck muscles were surgically removed. The district court dismissed Daniels’ claims against the doctors, finding that because he did not name the individual doctor-defendants in his administrative appeals he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PLRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e. Daniels appeals the district court’s dismissal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand to the district court for adjudication on the merits of Daniels’ claim.

Under the PLRA, an inmate is required to use the administrative process that the state provides in order to exhaust his administrative remedies. See Butler v. Adams, 397 F.3d 1181, 1183 (9th Cir.2005). In preparing an administrative appeal, California regulations provide that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.