William Marshall v. Don Holloway

44 F. App'x 44
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedAugust 14, 2002
Docket02-1841
StatusUnpublished

This text of 44 F. App'x 44 (William Marshall v. Don Holloway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
William Marshall v. Don Holloway, 44 F. App'x 44 (8th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

William Marshall appeals from the district court’s adverse grant of summary judgment and dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. The district court determined that Marshall failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Because Marshall was not incarcerated or detained when he filed his complaint, we reverse and remand to the district court to consider his case on its merits. See Doe v. Washington County, 150 F.3d 920, 924 (8th Cir.1998). We decline to affirm the judgment on a basis not considered by the district court. See Cavegn v. Twin City Pipe Trades Pension Plan, 223 F.3d 827, 831 (8th Cir.2000). We also deny Marshall’s pending motion.

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

Related

Doe v. Washington County
150 F.3d 920 (Eighth Circuit, 1998)
Bernard Cavegn v. Twin City Pipe Trades Pension Plan
223 F.3d 827 (Eighth Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 F. App'x 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-marshall-v-don-holloway-ca8-2002.