(PC) Reed v. Leatherman ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PETER J. REED, No. 2:18-cv-0038 KJM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 D. LEATHERMAN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed with this action in forma pauperis 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. On August 18, 2021, plaintiff filed a request for a court appointed 20 medical expert. The expenditure of public funds on behalf of an indigent litigant is proper only 21 when authorized by Congress. Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1989). The in forma 22 pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for court appointed medical 23 experts for litigants. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs request for a court appointed 2 || medical expert (ECF No. 50) is denied. 3 | Dated: August 20, 2021 Card ht fa he 4 CAROLYN K.DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 fi 9 reed0038.31.¢ 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28