Cohen v. Corrections Corp. of America

588 F.3d 299, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 27926, 2008 WL 7181210
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedOctober 6, 2008
Docket06-3168, 06-3169, 06-3170
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 588 F.3d 299 (Cohen v. Corrections Corp. of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cohen v. Corrections Corp. of America, 588 F.3d 299, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 27926, 2008 WL 7181210 (6th Cir. 2008).

Opinion

ORDER

On October 27, 2006, this court issued an opinion affirming the district court’s judgment dismissing L.C. Cohen’s civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 2000bb, and 2000cc-l. The district court’s dismissal, and our affirmance, was based on Cohen’s failure to allege exhaustion of his available administrative remedies prior to filing his complaint. Our decision was in accordance with the law of this circuit at that time.

Following our decision, Cohen filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. On November 6, 2007, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the decision of this panel, and remanded the case to this court for further consideration in light of Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 127 S.Ct. 910, 166 L.Ed.2d 798 (2007). We requested that Cohen file a supplemental brief outlining his position which he has now filed. After careful review and consideration of Jones, we find that Jones requires reversal of our prior disposition of this case.

In Jones, the Court held that under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, et seq., a prisoner is not required to specifically plead or demonstrate exhaustion in his complaint. Id. at 921. The Court further held that “exhaustion is not per se inadequate simply because an individual later sued was not named in the grievance.” Id. at 923. The Court found our circuit’s imposition of the prerequisite to properly exhaust a claim prior to filing a complaint was “unwarranted.” Id.

As our decision and the judgment of the district court was based on the precedents of this court that have been overruled in Jones, we therefore vacate our prior decision, reverse the district court’s judgment, and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings.

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

Related

Leslie Cohen v. Corrections Corporation of Am.
439 F. App'x 489 (Sixth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
588 F.3d 299, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 27926, 2008 WL 7181210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-corrections-corp-of-america-ca6-2008.