Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06106/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06106-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN BERNARD BROOKS, 1:03-CV-6106 AWI SMS P

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF EXPERT 

vs. WITNESS

RAYMOND ANDREWS, et al., (Doc. 101)

Defendants.

 /

On September 12, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion for the appointment of an expert medical

witness. The district court has the discretion to appoint an expert pursuant to Rule 706(a) of the Federal

Rules of Evidence, which reads, in part, “[t]he court may on its own motion or on the motion of any

party enter an order to show cause why expert witnesses should not be appointed . . . .” Fed. R. Evid.

706(a); Walker v. American Home Shield Long Term Disability Plan, 180 F.3d 1065, 1071 (9th Cir.

1999). Pursuant to Rule 702, “[i]f scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the

trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert

by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or

otherwise.” Fed. R. Evid. 702.

The function of an expert witness is to testify at trial to assist the trier of fact in understanding

the evidence. Plaintiff may re-file his motion at such time that it appears this matter will be set for trial.

Until that time, any motion for the appointment of an expert is premature. 

Case 1:03-cv-06106-LJO -SMS Document 105 Filed 10/11/05 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

Based on the foregoing, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of an expert witness, filed

September 12, 2005, is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 7, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

i0d3h8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06106-LJO -SMS Document 105 Filed 10/11/05 Page 2 of 2