Opinion
No. 313, 2002
Submitted: November 15, 2002
Decided: December 12, 2002
Court Below-Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County C.A. No. 02C-03-127
Affirmed.
Unpublished opinion is below.
DAVID L. WATSON, Plaintiff Below-Appellant, v. DELAWARE CORRECTIONAL CENTER, ROBERT SNYDER, LAWRENCE MCGUIGAN, CHARLES S. CUNNINGHAM, JOSEPH BELANGER, DELAWARE MEDICAL SERVICES, INC., and GEORGIA L. PERDUE, Defendants Below-Appellees. No. 313, 2002 In the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware. Submitted: November 15, 2002 Decided: December 12, 2002
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, BERGER, and STEELE, Justices.
Myron T. Steele, Justice
ORDER
This 12th day of December 2002, upon consideration of the appellant's opening brief and certain appellees' motion to affirm, it appears to the Court that:
(1) The plaintiff-appellant, David L. Watson, filed this appeal from the Superior Court's order dismissing his complaint following a bench trial. Watson is incarcerated at the Delaware Correctional Center. He filed a complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that prison officials were subjecting him to cruel and unusual punishment by not permitting him to take his arthritis medication in the manner prescribed by his doctor. After hearing evidence and considering legal memoranda submitted by the parties, the Superior Court dismissed Watson's complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) because Watson had failed first to exhaust the administrative remedies available to him. The Superior Court found, as a matter of fact, that Watson had failed to pursue the prison grievance procedures that were available to him. The State defendants have filed a motion to affirm the Superior Court's judgment.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), provides:
No 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.
(2) Having carefully considered the parties' respective positions, we find it manifest that the judgment of the Superior Court should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court's well-reasoned decision dated May 22, 2002. The Superior Court's holding that Watson was required to exhaust the administrative remedies available to him before filing a lawsuit is a matter of settled law.
Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 532 (2002) (holding that the 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.")
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.