Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00416/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00416-17/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY DEWAYNE LEE TURNER,

Plaintiff,

v.

SACRAMENTO CITY FIRE DEPT., et 

al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:19-cv-0416 TLN DB P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a former state prisoner, proceeds pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. This case proceeds on plaintiff’s fourth amended complaint filed on October 14, 2020. 

(ECF No. 22.) Plaintiff has filed two requests for a copy of the transcript of his July 21, 2022 

deposition. (ECF Nos. 76, 78.)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e)(1) provides, pertinent part: “On request by the 

deponent . . . before the deposition is completed, the deponent must be allowed 30 days after 

being notified by the officer that the transcript . . . is available in which: (A) to review the 

transcript. . . .; and (B) if there are changes in form or substance, to sign a statement listing the 

changes and the reasons for making them.” Here, though, plaintiff does not indicate that he 

requested, before the completion of his deposition, to review the resulting transcript. Instead, it 

appears plaintiff is requesting a free copy of his deposition transcript.

////

Case 2:19-cv-00416-TLN-SCR Document 80 Filed 10/31/22 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

The court is not in possession of the deposition transcript. The court is also without 

authority to order the court reporter provide plaintiff with a free copy of the deposition transcript. 

Although plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this case, it is well 

established that “the expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant] is proper only 

when authorized by Congress.” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211 (9th Cir. 1989) (quoting 

United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976)). The expenditure of public funds for 

deposition transcripts is not authorized by the in forma pauperis statute or any other statute. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915.

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s requests for a copy of his 

deposition transcript are DENIED.

Dated: October 31, 2022

DLB7

turn0416.dt

Case 2:19-cv-00416-TLN-SCR Document 80 Filed 10/31/22 Page 2 of 2