Buckins v. McCoy et al

Filing 31

ORDER QUASHING SERVICE ON DEBORAH M. WALKER NEE HAYWARD AND DENYING REQUEST FOR FUNDING 29 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 9/20/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/20/2017: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tfS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DARRELL EDWARD BUCKINS, Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 10 BRENDA MCCOY, et al., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 16-cv-06157-SI Defendants. ORDER QUASHING SERVICE ON DEBORAH M. WALKER NEE HAYWARD AND DENYING REQUEST FOR FUNDING Re: Dkt. No. 20 12 13 A. Deborah M. Walker, formerly known as Deborah M. Hayward, Is Dismissed 14 In this pro se prisoner’s civil rights action, Darrell Buckins complained about responses to 15 his medical needs from December 2014 through August 2015 while he was housed at the Glenn 16 Dyer Detention Facility in Oakland, California. 17 defendants, including a defendant identified as Debra Walker, L.V.N. 18 residential address in the Los Angeles suburb of Covina, California, to serve this defendant. 19 Docket No. 14. The summons and amended complaint were mailed to the Covina address. Service of process was ordered on eight Buckins provided a 20 The court then received a letter dated July 6, 2017, from Deborah M. Walker at the Covina 21 address, in which she stated that she was formerly known as Deborah M. Hayward and was not the 22 Debra Walker the plaintiff was trying to sue. The court noted that there appeared to be a genuine 23 possibility that Buckins had caused the wrong person to be served as a defendant in this action, 24 and ordered Buckins to notify the court whether he disagreed with Ms. Walker nee Hayward’s 25 assertion that she is not the Debra Walker he wanted to sue in this action. Docket No. 26. 26 Buckins then filed a document expressing his agreement that Ms. Walker nee Hayward is not the 27 person he intended to sue in this action. Docket No. 28. 28 1 In light of Buckins’ agreement that Ms. Walker nee Hayward is not the person he intended 2 to sue, the service of process on Ms. Walker nee Hayward is now QUASHED. Ms. Walker nee 3 Hayward is no longer a defendant in this action and has no further obligations in this action. 4 The clerk shall mail a copy of this order to Deborah Walker nee Hayward at 19845 E. 5 Navilla Place, Covina, CA 91724-3420. 6 Although Ms. Walker nee Hayward has been dismissed from this action, there is another 7 woman named Debra Walker who remains a defendant in this action. Service of process has not 8 yet occurred on her. The clerk shall correct the docket to show that Debra Walker remains a 9 defendant, and that service of process has not yet been accomplished on her. 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 B. Buckins’ Request For Funding 12 Darrell Buckins has requested that the court provide funding so he can make telephone 13 calls to other parties and investigate his case. He receives sixty dollars a week for his pro per 14 status in his criminal case, but those funds are limited to his criminal case. “[A]ny funding similar 15 would help” him in this action. Docket No. 29. 16 The expenditure of public funds on behalf of an indigent litigant is proper only when 17 authorized by Congress. See United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976); Tedder v. 18 Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211 (9th Cir. 1989). The in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, does 19 not authorize the expenditure of funds to pay for a private investigator, witness fees, or 20 miscellaneous expenses (such as telephone charges) incurred by a litigant pursuing a claim. Cf. 21 Tedder, 890 F.2d at 211-12 (pauper statute does not waive payment of fees or expenses for an 22 indigent's witnesses). Unlike a criminal case where a pro se defendant has a constitutional right to 23 represent himself, and therefore might have some sort of right to funding to enable the exercise of 24 that constitutional right, no similar constitutional concerns exist in civil suits. 25 The in forma pauperis statute does not permit the court to provide Buckins any funding to 26 support him in the prosecution of this civil rights action. Although it may be less desirable to him, 27 28 2 1 he can use the mails to communicate with other parties and conduct discovery. His request for 2 funding is DENIED. Docket No. 29. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 6 Dated: September 20, 2017 ______________________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?