Skip navigation
Punch and Jurists

Woodford v. Ngo, No. 05-416 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 81; 126 S.Ct. 2378) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Alito)

Loaded on May 1, 2006 published in Punch and Jurists May 15, 2006
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Exhaustion of Remedies.

This is another of a long series of almost banal and highly fact-specific cases dealing with the “exhaustion requirement” of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) - the outcome of which does little more than confirm the Supreme Court’s long-held desire to eliminate virtually all prisoner ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

More from this issue:

  1. Woodford v. Ngo, No. 05-416 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 81; 126 S.Ct. 2378) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Alito)
  2. Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, No. 04-1376 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 30; 126 S.Ct. 2422) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Souter)
  3. Davis v. Washington, No. 05-5224 (U.S. Supreme Court) (547 U.S. 813; 126 S.Ct. 2266) (June 19, 2006) (Justice Scalia)
  4. Samson v. California, No. 04-9728 (U.S. Supreme Court) (547 U.S. 843; 126 S.Ct. 2193) (June 19, 2006) (Justice Thomas)
  5. Dixon v. U.S., No. 05-7053 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 1; 126 S.Ct. 2437) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Stevens)
  6. U.S. v. Scott, No. 04-10090 (9th Cir.) (450 F.3d 863) (June 9, 2006) (Judge Alex Kozinski)
  7. U.S. v. Cage, No. 05-2079 (10th Cir.) (451 F.3d 585) (June 8, 2006) (Judge Carlos Lucero)

More from these topics: