Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02554/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02554-27/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

1

KING HALL CIVIL RIGHTS CLINIC

CARTER C. WHITE SBN: 164149

U.C. Davis School of Law

One Shields Avenue, Bldg. TB-30

Davis, CA 95616-8821

(530) 752-5440

Fax (530) 752-5788

ccwhite@ucdavis.edu

Counsel for Plaintiff

Gregory Lynn Norwood

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY LYNN NORWOOD,

Plaintiff,

vs.

STEVE J. VANCE, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. 2:03-cv-2554-GEB-GGH-P

APPOINTED COUNSEL’S EX PARTE

REQUEST FOR AUTHORITY TO

INCUR COSTS (expedited trial

transcripts) AND REQUEST FOR

PAYMENT

PART I

I, Carter C. White, declare:

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and in the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of California, and the supervising attorney of the King

Hall Civil Rights Clinic, appointed attorney of record for plaintiff in this action. 

2. This request is for a written order memorializing court approval of an expenditure that

it is my understanding Chief Judge Burrell already approved during the jury trial in this matter. I

understand that the procedure for obtaining authorityto incur costs under General Order 230 requires

advance approval of expenditures. As explained herein, due to the circumstances in which this

request arose, the procedure was not followed here. Nevertheless, because the expenditure was

already approved, and because the expenses were included in the plaintiff’s bill of costs and have

not been contested, the Court should approve this request.

Case 2:03-cv-02554-GEB -GGH Document 163 Filed 12/20/07 Page 1 of 3
 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

3. During the course of the trial of this matter, after I was appointed as counsel for

plaintiff, I believed that it is was reasonably necessary to the prosecution of this civil rights action

to obtain expedited rough transcripts during trial of the testimony of three defendants, Michael

Martel, Cheryl Plier and James Walker. The transcripts of Martel and Pliler were necessary because

the Plaintiff had made a motion to dismiss these Defendants, and the only way for us properly to

advise the client on this matter was to obtain a transcript because we had not been present in court

during the testimony. The transcript of Defendant Walker was necessary for several reasons. Mr.

Walker had become the Warden at CSP-Sacramento by the time of the trial. We needed a

representative sample of the testimony of the other Defendants in the case, in order to guide any

additional examination of these witnesses, and it was not feasible to order the testimony of all the

witnesses (we were not able to reach the court reporter regarding this request until that afternoon of

November 5, 2007, and the trial was to reconvene the next morning). Our investigation at that point

had led us to information about the Sophia Curry lawsuit (correctional officer whose assault had led

to the fourth lockdown at issue in the Norwood case), and we believed that Warden Walker’s earlier

testimony regarding the matter needed to be developed for further examination.

4. On November 5, 2007, I telephoned Kimberly Bennett, court reporter for Judge

Burrell, and requested these transcripts. It is my understanding that Ms. Bennett then obtained

authorization from Judge Burrell for payment of her fee for preparing these transcripts from the

Court’s Non-appropriated Fund. Apparently this approval was never memorialized in a written order

filed with the Clerk.

5. Because the preparation of these transcripts were necessarily obtained for use in the

case under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(2), Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 54(d)(1) and Local Rule 54-292(f)(3), I included

them in plaintiff’s bill of costs. (Doc. 156). Apparently after Ms. Bennett saw that I had included

her invoice as part of the bill of costs, she did not submit it for payment to the Court. Defendants

did not file an objection to the bill of costs within 10 days, and it is anticipated that the Clerk will

proceed to tax and enter the costs in the near future. Local Rule 54-292[c] & (d).

//

6. Processing payment of this invoice through the Court’s Non-appropriated fund will

Case 2:03-cv-02554-GEB -GGH Document 163 Filed 12/20/07 Page 2 of 3
 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

3

allow timely payment to the court reporter. Even after the Clerk’s entry of costs, it can take several

weeks for payment to be processed through the Attorney General’s office. Counsel for plaintiff will

make sure that this invoice is reimbursed to the Court’s Non-appropriated Fund at the time payment

of the bill of costs is made.

7. The cost of these expedited transcripts was $ 603, as evidenced by the attached

invoice. To date no other cost payments have been requested from the court in this case.

8. I understand and agree that all of the costs requested of, and paid by the court in this

case will be reimbursed out of any recovery or settlement received for the plaintiff (in the case of this

expenditure, out of payment received for the bill of costs).

9. Based upon the foregoing, I request that this court authorize the expenditure of

 $ 603 for the preparation of expedited rough transcripts during trial of the testimony of three

defendants, Michael Martel, Cheryl Plier and James Walker.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this is

executed this 18 day of December 2007, in Yolo County, California. th

/S/ Carter C. White

____________________________________

Carter C. White

Attorney for Plaintiff

The above expenditure is 

__X______ Approved.

________ Disapproved.

Dated: December 18, 2007

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:03-cv-02554-GEB -GGH Document 163 Filed 12/20/07 Page 3 of 3