Legal Opinion
Parthemore v. Col
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 6, 2013No. C072611PublishedCited by 49 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HULL, J.
Plaintiff Ira Don Parthemore, an incarcerated person representing himself in propria persona, appeals from a judgment dismissing his action against defendant Peter R. Col, an optometrist under contract with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR). The trial court found plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and sustained defendant’s demurrer to plaintiff’s first amended complaint without leave to amend (Wright v. State of California (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 659 [19 Cal.Rptr.3d 92]).
On appeal, plaintiff argues he was not required to exhaust the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Woodford v. NgoSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Ernest Lee Vaden v. K. Summerhill R.L. Gower St. Andre Chapman W.A. DuncanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Cantu v. Resolution Trust Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1992
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Romero v. Securus Technologies, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2016
- Bocanegra v. JakubowskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Van Audenhove v. PerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Santa Clara Valley Transp. Auth., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- (PC) Cole v. SotoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.