Legal Opinion

Mercer v. Rodriquez

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided June 8, 2004No. AC 24280PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

DRANGINIS, J.

This appeal requires that we decide whether the trial court properly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the plaintiffs federal claims because he failed to exhaust available administrative remedies as required by the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e (a). Although we conclude that the plaintiff failed to exhaust available administrative remedies, we also conclude that his failure to exhaust such remedies did not deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction. Nonetheless, we affirm the judgment of the trial court…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Porter v. NussleSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. Booth v. ChurnerSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Weinberger v. SalfiSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Eduardo M. Perez v. Wisconsin Department of Corrections and Michael J. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
  5. Tennessee v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 2004

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Baker v. RolnickCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  2. Feehan v. MarconeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2019
  3. Murphy v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
  4. Johnson v. RellConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
  5. State v. SaundersConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API