From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McElroy v. Cox

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 24, 2012
1:08-cv-01221-LJO-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 24, 2012)

Opinion

1:08-cv-01221-LJO-GSA-PC

04-24-2012

LATWAHN MCELROY, Plaintiff, v. ROY COX, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT

OF PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR AND COURT RUNNER


(Doc. 125.)

On April 23, 2012, Plaintiff filed a request for appointment of a private investigator and court runner, to assist him in litigating this action. (Doc. 125.)

The expenditure of public funds on behalf of an indigent litigant is proper only when authorized by Congress. See Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1989) (citations omitted). The in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for the purpose sought by Plaintiff in the instant request.

Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for the appointment of a private investigator and court runner is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Gary S. Austin

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

McElroy v. Cox

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 24, 2012
1:08-cv-01221-LJO-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 24, 2012)
Case details for

McElroy v. Cox

Case Details

Full title:LATWAHN MCELROY, Plaintiff, v. ROY COX, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 24, 2012

Citations

1:08-cv-01221-LJO-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 24, 2012)