District Judge Revises Prison Litigation Exhaustion Procedures After Supreme Court's Perttu Ruling

Prisoner Trashawn Harper sued corrections officials A. Mason and J. Purdue in federal court, though the nature of his civil rights claims remains unclear from the heavily procedural order. The defendants raised the standard defense that Harper failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing suit, as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

Judge Sweeney restructured the case timeline to account for the Supreme Court's 2025 decision in Perttu v. Richards, which 'partially overruled Pavey v. Conley' and expanded when exhaustion disputes must go to a jury rather than being decided by a judge alone. As Judge Sweeney explained, the new ruling means 'parties are entitled to a jury trial on PLRA exhaustion when that issue is intertwined with the merits of a claim protected by the Seventh Amendment.'

The court's order gives defendants three distinct paths forward after exhaustion discovery closes June 5, 2026, requiring them to 'choose from the next three options' by June 19. They can withdraw the exhaustion defense, request either a traditional Pavey hearing or jury trial under the new Perttu framework, or file for summary judgment if no genuine factual disputes exist.

The case builds on established Seventh Circuit precedent requiring courts to determine whether exhaustion disputes are 'intertwined' with the underlying civil rights claims. Under the previous Pavey framework, judges typically decided exhaustion questions themselves in bench hearings, but Perttu mandates jury trials when exhaustion facts overlap with the merits of constitutional claims.

Judge Sweeney placed the burden squarely on defendants to prove both 'that the administrative remedy process was available to the plaintiff and that he failed to utilize it,' citing Seventh Circuit authority. The court warned that if Harper presents evidence that remedies were unavailable, 'the defendants must consider whether the motion for summary judgment should be withdrawn.'

The order illustrates how Perttu is reshaping prison litigation practice nationwide. The Supreme Court's example involved a prisoner who alleged sexual abuse by a defendant who then destroyed grievance forms and threatened to kill the prisoner for filing complaints—a scenario where exhaustion and merits were clearly intertwined.

All other case activities remain stayed except for exhaustion-related discovery and briefing. The court granted defendants permission to depose Harper specifically about his exhaustion efforts and required both sides to exchange copies of any grievances, appeals, and related documents by April 27, 2026.