Kevin Jones v. Romona Huff, No. 19-3014 (8th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Court Description: [Per Curiam - Before Benton, Wollman and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. The district court did not err in dismissing this Section 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Download PDF

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-3014 ___________________________ Kevin D. Jones lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Romona Huff, Health Service Supervisor, CCS; Joe Paige, Warden, Tucker Unit, ADC; Ron Bailey, Captain, Tucker Unit, ADC; Guy Michael Henry, Doctor (Originally named as Henery) lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff ____________ Submitted: April 15, 2020 Filed: April 21, 2020 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BENTON, WOLLMAN, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Kevin D. Jones appeals the district court’s1grant of summary judgment to defendants based on his failure to exhaust administrative remedies in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon de novo review, we agree with the district court’s determination that Jones’s claims were unexhausted. See Faulkner v. Douglas Cty., Neb., 906 F.3d 728, 732 (8th Cir. 2018) (reviewing de novo grant of summary judgment); see also King v. Iowa Dep’t of Corr., 598 F.3d 1051, 1052 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies); Johnson v. Jones, 340 F.3d 624, 627 (8th Cir. 2003) (dismissal is required if inmate has not exhausted administrative remedies before filing federal suit). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Beth Deere, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -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.