Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Heilman v. Vojkufka

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 13, 2010

THOMAS JOHN HEILMAN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
VOJKUFKA, DEFENDANT.

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He requests a "fee waiver for Marshal's service of a subpoena for discovery." Dckt. Nos. 42, 50. The court issued plaintiff a subpoena duces tecum to obtain certain documents from non-party California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 on July 26, 2010. The court lacks power to waive plaintiff's obligation to pay the fee for service of the subpoena. Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989); Gonzalez v. Fenner, 128 F.R.D. 606, 607-08 (S.D.N.Y. 1989). Accordingly, plaintiff's requests for a fee waiver are hereby denied. However, this court has granted plaintiff permission to proceed in forma pauperis by order filed September 2, 2009. Dckt. No. 7.

Accordingly, by separate order the court will direct the United States Marshal to serve subpoenas received from plaintiff without prepayment of costs until further order of the court. Brown v. De Filippis, 125 F.R.D. 83, 84-85 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).

20100913

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.