Administrative Remedies

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Christopher Pyles v. Samuel Nwoabasi, et al

Case No.: 14-3289

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and BAUER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges

Focus: Administrative Remedies

Appellant has proven good cause for failing to make timely filing of grievance and defendants did not meet their burden of proving that Appellant failed to exhaust administration remedies first. Court err in granting summary judgment in favor of defendants.

“Federal law takes the same approach. Interpreting the “good cause” provision of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, federal courts have found it “in practice … the same standard as ‘due diligence’ before the rule” existed. Del Raine v. Carlson, 826 F.2d 698, 704 (7th Cir. 1987). It “applies in situations where there is no fault—excusable or otherwise.” Sherman v. Quinn, 668 F.3d 421, 425 (7th Cir. 2012). Usually, “good cause” is “occasioned by something that is not within the control of the movant.” Bishop v. Corsentino, 371 F.3d 1203, 1207 (10th Cir. 2004) (quoting FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(5) cmt. note (2002)); see also United States v. Hirsch, 207 F.3d 928, 929–30 (7th Cir. 2000) (suggesting that a clerk’s “failure to perform a ministerial act whose omission could have serious adverse consequences for a criminal defendant” would qualify as “good cause” for untimely appeal). Similarly, this court has found that a U.S. Marshal’s failure properly to serve a prisoner’s notice of appeal “is automatically ‘good cause.’” Sellers v. United States, 902 F.2d 598, 602 (7th Cir. 1990).”

Reversed and Remanded

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.