Addison v. Ridgeland Correctional Institution

112 F. App'x 306
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 9, 2004
DocketNo. 04-6877
StatusPublished

This text of 112 F. App'x 306 (Addison v. Ridgeland Correctional Institution) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Addison v. Ridgeland Correctional Institution, 112 F. App'x 306 (4th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James Calvin Addison seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) [307]*307complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The district court properly required exhaustion of administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) (2000). Because Addison did not demonstrate to the district court that he had exhausted administrative remedies or that such remedies were not available, the court’s dismissal of the action, without prejudice, was not an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Suits by prisoners
42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 F. App'x 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/addison-v-ridgeland-correctional-institution-ca4-2004.