About: Ross v. Blake

An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "special circumstances" cannot excuse an inmate's failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, but clarified that inmates are required to exhaust only administrative remedies that are genuinely available. In so doing, it vacated and remanded the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Property	Value
dbo:abstract	Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "special circumstances" cannot excuse an inmate's failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, but clarified that inmates are required to exhaust only administrative remedies that are genuinely available. In so doing, it vacated and remanded the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink	https://www.oyez.org/cases/2015/15-339 http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/161080p.pdf http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/05/18/16-15597.pdf https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/ross-v-blake/ http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/48da08d2-3e6d-487e-9307-7e8459167a61/3/doc/14-4777_opn.pdf%23xml=http:/www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/48da08d2-3e6d-487e-9307-7e8459167a61/3/hilite/ http://jaapl.org/content/45/1/116 http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/07/172783P.pdf http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl%3FSubmit=Display&Path=Y2018/D10-09/C:15-3298:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:2231053:S:0 https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2017/oct/10/second-circuit-ross-abrogates-special-circumstances-exhaustion-exception/ http://jlsp.law.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2018/04/Vol51-Cohen.pdf https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2016/06/mixed-result-in-state-prisoner-rights-case.html https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/578/15-339/ https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3209793/ross-v-blake/ https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/15-339 https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20160727084 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-339_1b7d.pdf https://fedsoc.org/commentary/podcasts/ross-v-blake-post-decision-scotuscast https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-497_p8k0.pdf
dbo:wikiPageID	50737013 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength	15610 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID	1076336557 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink	dbr:Prison_Litigation_Reform_Act dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_578 dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_by_the_Roberts_Court dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fourth_Circuit dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Maryland dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:Elena_Kagan dbr:G._Steven_Agee dbr:Third_Enforcement_Act dbr:Administrative_Law_Review dbr:4th_Cir. dbr:Alexander_Williams_Jr. dbr:Journal_of_the_American_Academy_of_Psychiatry_and_the_Law dbr:Associate_Justice_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Act dbr:Certiorari dbr:Woodford_v._Ngo dbr:Majority_opinion dbr:United_States_Reports dbr:Exhaustion_of_remedies dbr:Prison_Litigation_Reform_Act_of_1995 dbr:F.3d
dbp:arguedate	0001-03-29 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear	2016 (xsd:integer)
dbp:concurrence	Thomas (en) Breyer (en)
dbp:decidedate	0001-06-06 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear	2016 (xsd:integer)
dbp:docket	15 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullname	Michael Ross, Petitioner v. Shaidon Blake (en)
dbp:holding	The Prison Litigation Reform Act’s requirement to exhaust administrative remedies does not have a “special circumstances” exception, but inmates are only required to exhaust administrative remedies that are genuinely available to them. (en)
dbp:joinmajority	Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, Sotomayor (en)
dbp:lawsapplied	dbr:Prison_Litigation_Reform_Act_of_1995
dbp:litigants	Ross v. Blake (en)
dbp:majority	Kagan (en)
dbp:opinionannouncement	https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-339_1b7d.pdf
dbp:oralargument	https://www.oyez.org/cases/2015/15-339
dbp:parallelcitations	172800.0
dbp:prior	25920.0
dbp:uspage	___ (en)
dbp:usvol	578 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case
dcterms:subject	dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court
rdf:type	owl:Thing dbo:Case dbo:LegalCase dbo:UnitOfWork wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase
rdfs:comment	Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "special circumstances" cannot excuse an inmate's failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, but clarified that inmates are required to exhaust only administrative remedies that are genuinely available. In so doing, it vacated and remanded the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. (en)
rdfs:label	Ross v. Blake (en)
owl:sameAs	yago-res:Ross v. Blake wikidata:Ross v. Blake https://global.dbpedia.org/id/2LYeW
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:Ross_v._Blake?oldid=1076336557&ns=0
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:Ross_v._Blake
foaf:name	Michael Ross, Petitioner v. Shaidon Blake (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of	dbr:Ross_v_Blake
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of	dbr:Prison_Litigation_Reform_Act dbr:Fry_v._Napoleon_Community_Schools dbr:Ross_v_Blake
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:Ross_v._Blake