Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05254/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05254-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 Plaintiff mistakenly asserts that his motion was denied due to court fees and mileage. (Doc. 124, 8:10-14.) 1

There were no court fees involved. Plaintiff is required by statute to pay a daily witness fee of $40.00 plus roundtrip mileage for each unincarcerated witness. 28 U.S.C. § 1821. It is these fees and costs that plaintiff was required

to tender prior to the issuance of any subpoenas.

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALFONZO TOLBERT,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. PEELER,

Defendant.

 /

CASE NO. 1:03-cv-05254-LJO-SMS PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR A NEW TRIAL

(Doc. 124)

Plaintiff Alfonzo Tolbert (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner who was proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Trial by jury was held in this

matter and judgment was entered for defendant Peeler on September 25, 2007. On October 9, 2007,

plaintiff filed a motion seeking a new trial on the ground that the Court erred in denying his motion

to subpoena unincarcerated witnesses without having to submit the required fees and costs. Fed. R.

Civ. P. 59(a), 60(b).

Plaintiff argues that his in forma pauperis status permits the Court to direct the United States

Marshal to “advance” the witness fees if the witnesses are necessary and material, and that the costs

and fees should have been waived for him. (Doc. 124, 8:15-17.) Plaintiff’s position is incorrect. 1

As plaintiff was previously informed, the in forma pauperis status does not provide for the payment

of witness fees or travel expenses, and the Court did not err in denying plaintiff’s motion for a

Case 1:03-cv-05254-LJO -SMS Document 125 Filed 10/12/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

waiver of those costs and fees. 28 U.S.C. § 1915; Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir. 1993);

Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989); Morgan v. Doran, 2007 WL 781903, No. CVF-02-6316 AWI DLB P, *2 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2007).

Plaintiff’s motion for a new trial, filed October 9, 2007, is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 11, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05254-LJO -SMS Document 125 Filed 10/12/07 Page 2 of 2