Ronald Nussle, an inmate at the Cheshire Correctional Institution in Connecticut, asserted that, on or about June 15, 1996, several correctional officers asked him to leave his cell in an ominous manner (Dannenberg, 2002). According to Nussle these officers, "placed him against a wall and struck him with their hands, kneed him in the back, [and] pulled his hair"(Dannenberg, 2002). Nussle alleged that the attack was unprovoked and unjustified, and that the officers told him they would kill him if he reported the beating (Dannenberg, 2002).
Nussle did not file a formal complaint with prison administration that was due within 30 days according to prison rules. Instead, a scant three days before Connecticut's three year statute of limitations expired in June 1999, Ronald Nussle filed a 42 U.S.C. §1983 suit alleging cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment (Dannenberg, 2002). The Federal District Court dismissed Nussle's complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, per the PLRA's 42 U.S.C. §1997e (a) provision (Dannenberg, 2002). …show more content…
The Supreme Court questioned the obligation of prisoners who claim denial of their federal rights while incarcerated to exhaust prison grievance procedures before seeking judicial relief. Ronald Nussle was brought immediately before the Court without filing an inmate grievance. His complaint charged that corrections officers singled him out for a severe beating that was in violation of the Eight Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishments” (Mack, 2003). That fact alone served as the foundation for Nussle’s entire legal