Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Norman Z. Flick v. Julie W. Alba and Peter M. Carlson
Norman Z. Flick v. Julie W. Alba & Peter M. Carlson, 932 F.2d 728 (8th Cir. 1991)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1991-05-06
- Topic
- bankruptcy
How later courts describe this case
- stating that the federal grievance regulations providing for an administrative remedy procedure do not a create liberty interest in access to that procedure.”
- noting that, although prisoners have federal constitutional rights to 17 petition the government for redress of grievances and access to the courts, those rights are 18 “not compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance”
- noting that although prisoners have a First Amendment right to petition the 5 government for redress of grievances and access to the courts, those rights are “not 6 compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance.”
- noting that although prisoners have a First Amendment right to petition 8 the government for redress of grievances and access to the courts, those rights are “not 9 compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance.”
- noting that although prisoners have a federal constitutional right to petition the 28 government for redress of grievances and access to the courts, those rights are “not 1 compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance.”
- noting that although prisoners have 6 federal constitutional rights to petition the government for redress of grievances and of 7 access to the courts, those rights are “not compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain 8 his grievance.”
- federal grievance regulations providing for administrative remedy procedure do not create liberty interest in access to that procedure
- federal regulations providing administrative remedy in Bureau of prisons do not create a liberty interest
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Norman Z. Flick v. Julie W. Alba and Peter M. Carlson. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 339 opinions
Norman Z. Flick, an inmate at the Federal Medical Center (FMC) in Rochester, Minnesota, appeals the district court’s 1 order granting defendant prison officials’ motion for summary judgment. We affirm.
Flick filed his Bivens-type complaint against the case manager coordinator and the warden of FMC seeking injunctive relief and damages for their denial of his right of access to the prison’s administrative remedy procedure. We conclude that the federal regulations providing for an administrative remedy procedure do not in and of themselves create a liberty interest in access to that procedure. When the claim underlying the administrative grievance involves a constitutional right, the prisoner’s right to petition the government for redress is the right of access to the courts, which is not compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance. See Azeez v. DeRobertis, 568 F.Supp. 8, 10 (N.D.Ill.1982) (although state prison grievance procedures “may be evidence of a parent substantive right, they do not in themselves trigger a protected liberty interest”). 2
Accordingly, we affirm.