Coates v. Southwest Airlines Company
ORDER granting 28 Sealed Motion for preauthorization. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 9/10/2014. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
REGINA D. COATES
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES COMPANY
NO: 4:13CV00545 SWW
Plaintiff commenced this employment dispute pro se, and the Court appointed attorney
Phyllis B. Eddins to represent her. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion pursuant to Local
Rule 83.6,1 seeking pre-authorization to incur out-of-pocket expenses in connection with a
deposition planned for September 11, 2014 (ECF No. 28, filed under seal). Plaintiff has fully
complied with the requirements of Local Rule 83.6, and the motion for preauthorization (ECF
No. 28) is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Under Local Rule 83.6, reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses of appointed counsel
may be paid from monies derived from annual fees paid by attorneys admitted to practice before
the Court. Rule 83.6(5) states that an application for disbursement from the fund must be made
in accordance with policies and guidelines contained in Exhibit A to Rule 83.6. Subsection two
(2) of the policies and guidelines states that before an attorney “expends $500 for which that
attorney intends to see reimbursement from the fund, written approval must be obtained from a
district court judge or a magistrate judge.” Subsection four (4) of the policies and guidelines
requires that requests for approval of expenditures contain, among other things, a “detailed
itemization of all costs and expenses for which the disbursement or expenditure is requested.”
Additionally, subsection three (3) of the Rule states that before the Court may authorize an
expenditure in excess of $500, the district judge or magistrate judge shall inquire of the Clerk of
the Court as to the impact of the proposed expenditure on the fund.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?