Toney v. Hakala et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs request for appointment of medical expert is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of the civil docket for case number 4:10-CV-2056 to Plaintiff. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 3/4/2013. (RAK)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
MICHAEL HAKALA, et al.,
Case No. 4:10-CV-2056-JAR
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s letter dated February 25, 2013. (Doc. No. 220) Upon
consideration, the Court construes Plaintiff’s letter as a request for appointment of a medical
expert. “No civil litigant, even an indigent one, has a legal right to such aid.” Grace v. Hakala,
2012 WL 2190902, at *3 (E.D.Mo. June 14, 2012) (quoting Smith v. Carroll, 602 F.Supp.2d 521,
526 (D.Del.2009)). See also Brown v. United States, 74 Fed.Appx. 611, 614–15 (7th Cir.2003)
(“[The plaintiff] seeks to compel the government to bear the cost of and responsibility for hiring
an expert witness to testify on his behalf.... [N]o civil litigant, even an indigent one, has a legal
right to such aid.”). If Plaintiff requires additional time to secure a medical expert, he may file a
motion with the Court. In his letter Plaintiff also requests a current docket sheet.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for appointment of medical expert is
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of the civil
docket for case number 4:10-CV-2056 to Plaintiff.
Dated this 4th day of March, 2013.
JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?