Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • James Preston Smith v. Edward Murray, Director, David Garraghty, Warden, 934 F.2d 320, 4th Cir. (1991)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    The document is an unpublished appellate court opinion from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding a case brought by James Preston Smith under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The district court had dismissed Smith's case without prejudice for failing to demonstrate that he had exhausted his administrative remedies. The appellate court vacated the district court's dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings, finding that while Smith did not strictly comply with demonstrating exhaustion, the record showed he had in fact exhausted his claim in a prior unpublished Fourth Circuit opinion. The appellate court remanded the case in the interest of judicial economy for the district court to consider the merits of Smith's claim about certain radio equipment that was confiscated.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1991-05-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 934 F.2d 320 Docket: 90-7142

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is an unpublished appellate court opinion from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding a case brought by James Preston Smith under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The district court had dismissed Smith's case without prejudice for failing to demonstrate that he had exhausted his administrative remedies. The appellate court vacated the district court's dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings, finding that while Smith did not strictly comply with demonstrating exhaustion, the record showed he had in fact exhausted his claim in a prior unpublished Fourth Circuit opinion. The appellate court remanded the case in the interest of judicial economy for the district court to consider the merits of Smith's claim about certain radio equipment that was confiscated.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    James Preston Smith v. Edward Murray, Director, David Garraghty, Warden, 934 F.2d 320, 4th Cir. (1991)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is an unpublished appellate court opinion from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding a case brought by James Preston Smith under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The district court had dismissed Smith's case without prejudice for failing to demonstrate that he had exhausted his administrative remedies. The appellate court vacated the district court's dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings, finding that while Smith did not strictly comply with demonstrating exhaustion, the record showed he had in fact exhausted his claim in a prior unpublished Fourth Circuit opinion. The appellate court remanded the case in the interest of judicial economy for the district court to consider the merits of Smith's claim about certain radio equipment that was confiscated.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    934 F.

    2d 320
    Unpublished Disposition

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    James Preston SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Edward MURRAY, Director, David Garraghty, Warden,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 90-7142.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Nov. 20, 1990.
    Decided May 29, 1991.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
    Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, District Judge. (CA-90-3323)
    James Preston Smith, appellant pro se.
    E.D.Va.
    VACATED AND REMANDED.
    Before PHILLIPS, CHAPMAN and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    James Preston Smith appeals the district court's dismissal without prejudice of
    Smith's 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action for failure to demonstrate administrative
    exhaustion. While it was not clear from the record as it existed prior to the
    dismissal of the action, and while Smith did not comply with the district court's
    order that he demonstrate exhaustion, Smith correctly stated in his notice of

    appeal that he in fact had exhausted his claim, as we previously determined in


    Smith v. Murray, No. 90-6036 (4th Cir. Apr. 16, 1990) (unpublished).1
    Technically, Smith did not demonstrate exhaustion of his claim by, for instance,
    identifying with specificity our earlier opinion. Nonetheless, in the interest of
    judicial economy, we remand to the district court for consideration of the
    merits of the claim that certain radio equipment was improperly confiscated
    upon Smith's arrival at Nottaway Correctional Center.
    2

    As our review of the record and other materials before us reveals that it would
    not significantly aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument.

    VACATED AND REMANDED.

    Smith said in his complaint simply that he had exhausted his claim and
    referenced an unspecified ruling from the "Court of Appeals April 16, 1990" as
    proof of exhaustion

    You might also like