Lamb v. Mendoza et al, No. 2:2007cv00449 - Document 39 (S.D. Tex. 2008)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 37 Motion For Appointment of Expert.(Signed by Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington) Parties notified.(mserpa, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Lamb v. Mendoza et al Doc. 39 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MICHAEL TED LAMB, Plaintiff, VS. OSCAR MENDOZA, et al, Defendants. § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. C-07-449 § § § § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF EXPERT Pending is plaintiff’s motion for appointment of an expert (D.E. 37). The plain language of the in forma pauperis statute does not provide for the appointment of expert witnesses to aid an indigent plaintiff. 28 U.S.C. § 1915; Pedraza v. Jones, 71 F.3d 194, 196 (5th Cir. 1995); Hannah v. United States, 523 F.3d 597 (5th Cir. 2008). Plaintiff has not shown that any compelling circumstances requiring the appointment of an expert. Plaintiff’s motion (D.E. 37) is denied. ORDERED this 3rd day of June, 2008. ___________________________________ B. JANICE ELLINGTON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1/1 Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
