Legal Opinion
Edney v. Karrigan
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 14, 1999No. 99 Civ. 1675(RWS)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Defendants Sergeant H. Kerrigan (“Kerrigan”), who has been sued in this action as “Karrigan,” and Corrections Officer White (“White”) (collectively the “Defendants”), have moved to dismiss the complaint of plaintiff pro se Herbert D. Edney (“Edney”) pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P. More specifically, Kerrigan and White seek dismissal on the grounds that Edney failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing suit, as is required by the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (“PLRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), and that the complaint…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Rhodes v. ChapmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Santiago v. MeinsenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Arnold v. GoetzDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Blaylock v. BordenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- Castillo v. BudayDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Majid v. WilhelmDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000