Opinion
02 Civ. 2148 (JSM)
May 29, 2003
OPINION ORDER
Plaintiff, a prisoner in state custody, brings this action alleging that various prison officials subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment by their indifference to his serious medical needs. The Defendants move to dismiss on two grounds: 1) Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and 2) the medical complaints cited by Plaintiffs do not constitute serious medical needs.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") provides that "[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under Section 1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted." 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). As Judge Buchwald explained in Byas v. New York, No. 99 Civ. 1673, 2002 WL 1586963, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 17, 2002):
"[T]he PLRA's exhaustion requirement applies to all inmate suits about prison life, whether they involve general circumstances or particular episodes, and whether they allege excessive force or some other wrong' (quoting Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 122 So. Ct. 983, 992 (2002)). . . . Failure to exhaust prior to bringing suit will result in dismissal, regardless of a plaintiff's later efforts to exhaust. (citing Neal v. Goord, 267 F.3d 116, 117-118 (2d Cir. 2001)).Byas, 2002 WL 1586963, at *2.
Thus, even if a plaintiff files a valid grievance, he must still exhaust all appeals before filing suit.
Here Plaintiff did not file a grievance with respect to the conduct of any of the Defendants named in this case. Plaintiff did file one grievance with respect to one of the medical claims asserted here in which he asked for new medical footwear and to be seen by an outside specialist. Although that grievance was denied and the denial was concurred in by the superintendent, Plaintiff did not exhaust his appellate remedies within the prison system by appealing to the central office review committee. Thus, even that claim must be dismissed. Sulton v. Grenier, No. 00 cv. 0727, 2000 U.S. Dist. Lexis 17887, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 11, 2000); Petit v. Bender, No. 99 cv. 0969, 2000 U.S. Dist. Lexis 3536, at *67 (S.D.N.Y. March 20, 2000).
Since Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies the complaint must be dismissed. Therefore, the Court need not reach the question whether Plaintiff's medical conditions constituted serious medical needs.
For the foregoing reasons, the complaint is dismissed.