Marques Butler v. Brazelton et al

Filing 44

ORDER Setting Evidentiary Hearing 17 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 4/21/17:Evidentiary Hearing set for 6/16/2017 at 12:30 PM in Courtroom 10 (EPG) before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

MARQUES BUTLER,

9
10
11
12

1:14-cv-01220-DAD-EPG (PC)

Plaintiff,

ORDER SETTING EVIDENTIARY
HEARING
(ECF NO. 17)

v.
R. BOOZER, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14

On April 19, 2017, the Court held a hearing on Defendants’ motion for summary

15

judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Plaintiff Marques Butler telephonically

16

appeared on his own behalf. Counsel Gabrielle DeSantis-Nield telephonically appeared on behalf

17

of defendant S. Espino.

18

defendants except defendant S. Espino. After hearing arguments, as well as reviewing the briefs

19

and the evidence, the Court has determined that there is a dispute of fact and that an Albino

20

evidentiary hearing is necessary. See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1170 (9th Cir. 2014).

Counsel Cassandra Shryock personally appeared on behalf of all

21

As discussed at the hearing, the parties should be prepared to present evidence regarding

22

what occurred during Plaintiff’s interview that led to the cancelation of Plaintiff’s appeal (appeal

23

log no. PVSP-12-02350).

24

regarding Plaintiff’s appeal of the cancellation of the appeal with appeal log no. PVSP-12-02350.

Additionally, the parties should be prepared to put on evidence

25

The parties do not need to present evidence regarding the following factual allegations,

26

which the Court regards as undisputed: 1) That the California Department of Corrections and

27

Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) has an administrative appeals system for prisoners’ complaints,

28
1

1

described in the California Code of Regulations, Title 15, Section 3084, et seq.; 2) That California

2

Code of Regulations, Title 15, section 3084.1(a) provides that any inmate may appeal any

3

departmental decision, action, condition, or policy which they can demonstrate as having an

4

adverse effect upon their welfare; 3) That there are three levels of review required for inmates to

5

complete in order to exhaust administrative remedies; 4) That grievances classified as “staff

6

complaints” bypass the first level of review and are initially reviewed at the second level; and 5)

7

That a final review and decision by the Chief of the Office of Appeals, also known as the “third

8

level” or Director’s level of appeal, exhausts the inmate’s administrative remedies.

9

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an Albino evidentiary

10

hearing is set before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on June 16, 2017, at 12:30 p.m., at the

11

Robert E. Coyle Federal Courthouse, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721, in Courtroom #10.

12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 21, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2