Baylor v. Polavapu, No. 22-40153 (5th Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 22-40153 Document: 00516677221 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/15/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 22-40153 Summary Calendar March 15, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Troy D. Baylor, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Sreedhar Polavapu, M.D., Defendant—Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:18-CV-594 Before Jones, Stewart, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* During his confinement at the Federal Correctional Complex in Beaumont, Texas, Troy Baylor claims that he was assaulted by another inmate. He was taken to a local medical provider to treat his injuries. The doctor who treated Baylor set a follow-up appointment for four weeks later. * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 22-40153 Document: 00516677221 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/15/2023 No. 22-40153 Baylor claims that the defendant, a doctor whose employer contracted with the prison, was responsible for transporting Baylor to the follow-up appointment yet failed to do so. He brought this pro se lawsuit against the defendant under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, which found that Baylor failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by the Section 1997e of the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA). On appeal, Baylor raises a single issue: that he exhausted his remedies because he filed a Federal Tort Claim form, which was reviewed and denied by prison administrators. This is wrong. The process for filing a claim under FTCA is separate from the exhaustion requirements of CRIPA. For the reasons given in the report and recommendation, Baylor has failed to exhaust under CRIPA. AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.