Inmate wins ADA appeal in 2d Circuit because jail did not timely resolve his internal grievance

It occurs to me that inmates win their appeals in the Second Circuit more frequently than you might expect. This county jail inmate wins his appeal that alleges he was denied appropriate wheelchair accommodations. He lost in the district court over his alleged failure to file a proper grievance at the jail. The Court of Appeals reinstates the case.

The case is Dickinson v. York, summary order issued on October 5. Plaintiff is a paraplegic who says the wheelchair denials violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, the two primary disability rights statutes in the federal system. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, inmates have to file internal grievances with the jail before they can file suit in court. This means they also have to exhaust those internal grievance remedies. But what happens when the jail does not resolve the grievance under the deadlines imposed by the state regulations?

The facility is mandated to resolve the grievance and all internal appeals by a certain date. That did not happen here, so plaintiff filed his lawsuit without technically exhausting his administrative remedies. On the same day that the Court of Appeals decided this appeal, it issued United States v. Hayes, which said for the first time that the inmate can file suit if the jail takes too long to resolve the grievance, in violation of the regulations. That panel (Livingston, Nardini and Sullivan) decides this case as well. Following the holding in Hayes, the Court of Appeals rules in Dickinson's favor. And that, my friends, is how the appellate process works. Plaintiff A wins one case, and Plaintiff B uses that win for his own case.