Sergeant Haystings, et al. v. Albert B. Korb

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) provides: “No action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions * * * by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d) provides that “[o]n motion and reasonable notice” a district court may “permit a party to serve a supplemental pleading setting out any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the date of the pleading to be supplemented.” Courts of Appeals disagree about the relationship between these two provisions and are split as to whether a prisoner’s violation of the PLRA’s mandatory pre-suit exhaustion requirement can be remedied through a Rule 15(d) supplemental pleading. The question presented is as follows: When a prisoner violates the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e et seq., by initiating litigation without first exhausting administrative remedies, can the prisoner escape that violation by filing a supplemental pleading under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d)?