Halsema v. Benton County Jail et al
Filing
4
OPINION AND ORDER: this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 USC Sec 1915A. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 10/23/12. (cc: plaintiff) (ksp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION AT LAFAYETTE
SHANE A. HALSEMA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BENTON COUNTY JAIL,
and ERNIE WINCHESTER,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
NO. 4:12-CV-054
OPINION AND ORDER
Shane A. Halsema, a pro se prisoner, filed a complaint on
October 22, 2012. For the reasons set forth below, this case is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A so that
Shane A. Halsema may exhaust the administrative remedies that are
available to him at the Benton County Jail.
DISCUSSION
“A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed, and a
pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less
stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.”
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation marks and
citations omitted). Nevertheless, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,
the court must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and
dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief. In addition,
“[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions .
.
.
by
a
prisoner
confined
in
any
jail,
prison,
or
other
correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are
available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Although exhaustion
is an affirmative defense, “a plaintiff can plead himself out of
court. If he alleges facts that show he isn’t entitled to a
judgment . . ..” Early v. Bankers Life and Cas. Co., 959 F.2d 75,
79 (7th Cir. 1992) (citations omitted).
Here, Halsema alleges that he has been (and continues to be)
denied medical treatment for his hand. He also states that the
Benton County Jail has a grievance system that permits him to file
a grievance about these events. However, he states that he did not
file such a grievance because he did not expect that he would have
received a response.
Exhaustion is necessary even if the prisoner is
requesting relief that the relevant administrative review
board has no power to grant, such as monetary damages,
or if the prisoner believes that exhaustion is futile.
The sole objective of [42 U.S.C.] § 1997e(a) is to permit
the prison’s administrative process to run its course
before litigation begins.
Dole v. Chandler, 438 F.3d 804, 808-809 (7th Cir. 2006) (citations
and
quotation
marks
omitted).
“Section
1997e(a)
says
that
exhaustion must precede litigation. ‘No action shall be brought’
until exhaustion has been completed [and] . . . it is essential to
keep the courthouse doors closed until those efforts have run their
-2-
course.” Ford v. Johnson, 362 F.3d 395, 398 (7th Cir. 2004). “No
one can know whether administrative requests will be futile; the
only way to find out is to try.” Perez v. Wisconsin Dep’t of
Corrections, 182 F.3d 532, 536 (7th Cir. 1999). Indeed, there is
not even an “exception for prisoners who allege ‘imminent danger’
. . .." Fletcher v. Menard Corr. Ctr., 623 F.3d 1171, 1173 (7th
Cir. 2010). Therefore, this case must be dismissed until after
Halsema
has
exhausted
whatever
administrative
remedies
are
available to him at the Benton County Jail.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, this case is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A so that Shane A.
Halsema may exhaust the administrative remedies that are available
to him at the Benton County Jail.
DATED:
October 23, 2012
/s/RUDY LOZANO, Judge
United States District Court
-3-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?