Johnson v. De La Trinidad et al

Filing 21

ORDER Denying 15 Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Investigator. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 9/1/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lrf)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SEDRIC EUGENE JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

A. DE LA TRINIDAD, et al.,

15

Defendant.

Case No.: 17CV731-WQH-MDD
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
INVESTIGATOR
[ECF No. 15]

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action under 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983, claiming excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment

19

and property damages. (ECF No. 1). On August 31, 2017, Plaintiff filed a

20

Motion for Appointment of Courtroom Investigator, requesting that the Court

21

appoint an investigator to assist him in preparing evidence. (ECF No. 15).

22

Plaintiff contends that he needs the Court to appoint an investigator because

23

his status as a prisoner greatly limits his ability to gather documentation for

24

and litigate his lawsuit. (Id.)

25

Title 28, U.S.C. § 1915, authorizes federal courts to permit

26

commencement of a suit without prepayment of fees and costs upon a

27

showing of indigency and allows indigents who are unable to pay the entire
1
17CV731-WQH-MDD

1

filing fee upon filing to pay in installments. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) & (b).

2

Section 1915 does not authorize or require federal courts to finance or

3

subsidize a civil action or appeal by paying expert fees or other costs. Hadsell

4

v. Internal Revenue Service, 107 F.3d 750, 752 (9th Cir. 1997); Dixon v. Ylst,

5

990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993). The expenditure of public funds on behalf

6

of an indigent litigant is proper only when authorized by Congress. See

7

United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976); Tedder v. Odel, 890

8

F.2d 210, 211 (9th Cir. 1989). Plaintiff has not shown any Congressional

9

authority for the Court to pay for an investigator for him in this civil action.

10

An incarcerated pro se plaintiff may have great difficulty pursuing his action

11

from prison, but that does not mean that the Court can or must fund his

12

efforts. He must find a way to prosecute his action within his financial

13

means and consistent with his status as a prisoner.

14

Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for a private investigator is DENIED.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated: September 1, 2017

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2
17CV731-WQH-MDD