Mendoza v. Swann

Full title: DANIEL MENDOZA, Plaintiff, v. NEAL P. SWANN, D.D.S., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 15, 2015

2:13-cv-2366 AC P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2015)

Opinion

DANIEL MENDOZA, Plaintiff, v. NEAL P. SWANN, D.D.S., Defendants. No. 2:13-cv-2366 AC P United States District Court, Eastern District of California January 15, 2015

          ORDER

          ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

         On January 1, 2015, plaintiff filed a request for a court-appointed expert witness. The expenditure of public funds on behalf of an indigent litigant is proper only when authorized by Congress. Tedder v. Odel 890 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1989) (per curiam). Notwithstanding plaintiffs in forma pauperis status, Congress has not authorized the expenditure of public funds for expert witnesses. See 28 U.S.C. 8 1915.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs request for a court appointed expert witness (ECF No. 38) is DENIED.