Williams v. Ortega

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LANCE WILLIAMS, Case No.: 18cv547-LAB-MDD 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S v. MOTION TO APPOINT A PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR O. ORTEGA, et al., Defendants. [ECF No. 91] On October 21, 2020, Lance Williams (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a motion for appointment of a private investigator. (ECF No. 91). Plaintiff contends he needs an investigator to help locate and interview witnesses “to minimize jury trial time due to testifying.” (Id. at 1).

Title 28, U.S.C. § 1915, authorizes federal courts to permit commencement of a suit without prepayment of fees and costs upon a showing of indigency and allows indigents who are unable to pay the entire filing fee upon filing to pay in installments. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) & (b).

Section 1915 does not authorize or require federal courts to finance or subsidize a civil action or appeal by paying expert fees or other costs. Hadsell ||v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, 107 F.3d 750, 752 (9th Cir. ||1997); Dixon v. Yist, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993). The expenditure of || public funds on behalf of an indigent litigant is proper only when authorized ||by Congress. See United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976); || Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211 (9th Cir. 1989).

6 Plaintiff has not shown any Congressional authority for the Court to 7 for an investigator for him in this civil action. An incarcerated pro se || plaintiff may have great difficulty pursuing his action from prison, but that ||does not mean that the Court can or must fund his efforts. He must finda || way to prosecute his action within his financial means and consistent with || his status as a prisoner.

12 Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion for a private investigator is DENIED.

13 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 21, 2020 Mitel by. [= Hon. Mitchell D. Dembin 16 United States Magistrate Judge