Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
RONALD M. FELDMEIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. P. HAUSER, Case Manager, Corrections Corporation of America at La Palma Correctional Center, Eloy, AZ; R. WILLIAMS, Unit Manager, Corrections of America at La Palma Correctional Center, Eloy, AZ, Defendants-Appellees.
MEMORANDUM*
Ronald M. Feldmeier, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his safety. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We reverse and remand.
The district court concluded that Feldmeier's Form 22 failed to “clearly state” the issue such that it put prison officials on notice of the alleged wrong. We disagree. The Form 22 identified the topic as “threats by cellmate,” and explained that Feldmeier's cellmate “regularly uses physical intimidation and threats of violence against” Feldmeier and that Feldmeier needed officials to help in finding another cellmate. These allegations were sufficient to clearly state the issue. We therefore reverse and remand.
In light of the decision to remand, we do not reach the remaining issues on appeal.
We do not consider arguments, allegations, or evidence raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009); Kirshner v. Uniden Corp. of Am., 842 F.2d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1988).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 15-16176
Decided: January 26, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)