In the 1993 case of Charles K. Elder v. R.D. Holloway et al., Elder, a Tennessee state prisoner, filed a lawsuit against prison officials alleging that his Eighth Amendment rights were violated due to inadequate medical care for his heart condition and arthritis while in custody. The district court dismissed the suit without prejudice because Elder failed to exhaust all available administrative remedies before filing the lawsuit as required by law under section 1997e(a)(1) of Title 42 of U.S Code - Civil Rights Act (Prison Litigation Reform Act). On appeal, however, the Sixth Circuit Court reversed this decision stating that exhaustion was not necessary since it would be futile given that no effective remedy existed within the prison system for Elder's complaints about lack of proper medical treatment. The Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation and held unanimously that prisoners must exhaust all "available" administrative remedies before they can file lawsuits over conditions in federal court regardless if these internal procedures seem ineffective or futile.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Charles K. Elder v. R.D. Holloway et al., 1993, argued that the majority's decision to dismiss Elder's claim was incorrect and failed to consider important factors related to his allegations of racial discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The dissent pointed out that Elder had presented sufficient evidence suggesting a racially discriminatory motive behind his dismissal from employment, which should have been enough for his case to proceed further instead of being summarily dismissed by lower courts as it was done earlier. Furthermore, they believed that the majority misapplied legal standards regarding summary judgment and burden-shifting analysis in discrimination cases, thereby denying Elder a fair opportunity to prove his claims at trial.