IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 25, 2012
B. JOHNSON, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF EXPERT WITNESS ( Doc. 68.)
On August 10, 2012, Plaintiff filed a request for appointment of an expert witness to review medical records. (Doc. 68.)
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), and the in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for the purpose sought by Plaintiff in the instant request. Plaintiff requests a court-appointed expert under Federal Rule of Evidence 706. However, Rule 706(b) provides that "the compensation shall be paid by the parties" in civil cases, unless the civil action "involv[es] just compensation under the fifth amendment." F.R.E. 706(b). Because Plaintiff's action is a civil action which does not involve just compensation under the Fifth Amendment, Rule 706(b)'s public compensation provision does not apply to Plaintiff's action, and any expert witness fees would have to be paid by the parties.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for the appointment of an expert witness is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.