Merchant v. Corizon Health, Inc., No. 19-36093 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiff, an Idaho prisoner, filed suit alleging that the Idaho Department of Corrections (IDOC) and its medical provider, Corizon, were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and acted with negligence. Primarily at issue is whether the district court erred by excluding plaintiff's expert witnesses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1), which was case dispositive, because he did not properly disclose his experts under Rule 26(a)(2).
The panel concluded that the district court did not err because plaintiff repeatedly failed to meet his disclosure obligations, the district court reasonably concluded plaintiff's failures were not substantially justified or harmless, and he never moved for a lesser sanction. Therefore, plaintiff failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact for trial. The panel also concluded that the district court correctly found that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). Furthermore, the panel declined to construe plaintiff's Health Services Request as a properly filed grievance.
Court Description: Prisoner Civil Rights. The panel affirmed the district court’s exclusion of expert evidence under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1), and summary judgment in favor of prison officials in an action alleging defendants were deliberately indifferent to plaintiff’s medical needs. The panel held that the district court did not err by excluding plaintiff’s expert under Rule 37(c)(1) because plaintiff repeatedly failed to meet his disclosure obligations, as set forth in Rule 26(a)(2). The district court reasonably concluded that plaintiff’s failures were not substantially justified or harmless. The panel further noted that plaintiff had never moved the district court for a lesser sanction. Because the district court properly excluded plaintiff’s expert witnesses, it did not err in granting summary judgment to defendants because plaintiff failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact for trial. MERCHANT V. CORIZON HEALTH 3 Moreover, the district court did not err in holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because he failed to file an Offender Concern Form—the first step in Idaho Department of Corrections’ three-part grievance system set forth in Standard Operating Procedure 316.02.01.001. The panel declined to construe plaintiff’s Health Services Request as a properly filed grievance.
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.