Damon Earl FRANKLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim MCDONNELL, Los Angeles County Sheriff; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Decided: October 23, 2019
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Damon Earl Franklin, Pro Se Raymond Joseph Fuentes, Attorney, Fuentes & McNally, LLP, Glendale, CA, for Defendants - Appellees
California state prisoner Damon Earl Franklin appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his safety and negligence arising from his pretrial detention. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Franklin failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (proper exhaustion requires “using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits)”) (emphasis, citation, and internal quotation marks omitted); McBride v. Lopez, 807 F.3d 982, 986 (9th Cir. 2015) (to show that a threat rendered the prison grievance system unavailable, a prisoner must show that he subjectively believed prison officials would retaliate against him and that his belief was objectively reasonable).
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
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.