Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02534/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02534-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAMON LADALE SINEGAL, CDCR

# J-95722,

Plaintiff,

v.

E. DUARTE, et al.,

Defendants. 

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 11CV2534-BEN(JMA)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR DEPOSITIONS

[DOC. NO. 41] AND MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL AND EXPERT

WITNESS [DOC. NO. 44]

Plaintiff Ramon Ladale Sinegal, who is proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. §

1915(a), has filed a motion captioned “Plaintiff Request Court Orders for

Deposition” [Doc. No. 41] and a Motion for Appointment of Counsel and

Expert Witness [Doc. No. 44]. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s

motions are DENIED.

I. Motion Requesting Court Orders for Deposition

Plaintiff, who is presently incarcerated at California State Prison, Los

Angeles County, located in Lancaster, California, seeks to depose

Defendants H. Verduzco and C. Ortega by means of a tape or video

recorder and requests he be provided facilities for the deposition at

Case 3:11-cv-02534-BEN-JMA Document 45 Filed 09/25/13 Page 1 of 5
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

Lancaster, that the depositions be attended only by Plaintiff, defense

counsel and defendants, and that defense counsel supply the recording

device and supplies and maintain the original recording and provide a copy

to Plaintiff. Defendants filed an opposition to the motion on September 12,

2013. [Doc. No. 42.] 

The Court first notes that Plaintiff, as a matter of procedure, does not

require leave of Court to take Defendants’ depositions. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

30(a). Rather, he simply needs to follow the procedures set forth in the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Upon review of the applicable Rules, the

Court observes that Plaintiff is permitted to record a deposition by audio,

audio-visual, or stenographic means. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(3)(A). 

Depositions may be conducted with all participants in attendance, by

telephone or other remote means [Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(4)] or through

written questions [Fed. R. Civ. P. 31(a)].

Plaintiff must bear responsibility for the costs of recording any

deposition he notices. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(3)(A) Additionally, Plaintiff

would be responsible for arranging the presence of an officer authorized to

administer oaths either by federal law or by the law in the place of

examination, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(a)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P.

31(b), and would be required to bear any costs related thereto, at any

deposition he takes. The cost of the deposition will not be shifted to

Defendants or the Court and Plaintiff should bear in mind that he may also

be responsible for paying costs incurred by the California Department of

Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate any audio or videoconferencing

capabilities. 

Defendants Verduzco and Ortega are currently employed at

Calipatria State Prison, which is located in the Southern District, and

Plaintiff seeks to conduct their depositions in Lancaster, which is located in

2

Case 3:11-cv-02534-BEN-JMA Document 45 Filed 09/25/13 Page 2 of 5
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

the Central District. Defendants object to the proposed location, as well as

Plaintiff’s request that the depositions be attended only by Plaintiff, defense

counsel and defendants, and that defense counsel maintain the record of

any deposition. Plaintiff has not yet established compliance with the

requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, so it is premature for

the Court to address these issues.

If Plaintiff intends to conduct any depositions, he must first notice the

depositions, make arrangements to pay all required costs and coordinate

directly with Defendants’ counsel. If Plaintiff is able to satisfy these

requirements and thereafter needs assistance from the Court with

coordinating the depositions, he may file a motion setting forth his request. 

II. Motion for Appointment of Counsel & Expert Witness

“[T]here is no absolute right to counsel in civil proceedings.” Hedges

v. Resolution Trust Corp., 32 F.3d 1360, 1363 (9th Cir. 1994) (citation

omitted). District courts have discretion, however, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(1), to appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants upon a showing of

“exceptional circumstances.” See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017

(9th Cir. 1991). “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an

evaluation of both ‘the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability

ofthe petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of

the legal issues involved.” Neither of these factors is dispositive and both

must be viewed together before reaching a decision.’” Id. (citations

omitted).

Here, the facts alleged in the First Amended Complaint are not

complex and Plaintiff has demonstrated an ability to articulate the factual

and legal bases of his claim with sufficient clarity and to litigate his claim on

his own behalf. Based on the information currently before the Court, it is

clear that Plaintiff has the competence necessary to pursue his case.

3

Case 3:11-cv-02534-BEN-JMA Document 45 Filed 09/25/13 Page 3 of 5
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

Without more, this Court cannot conclude that there are “exceptional

circumstances” which would warrant the appointment of counsel in

Plaintiff’s case. Nor has Plaintiff submitted anything which would suggest

he is likely to succeed on the merits or that it would be in the interests of

justice for counsel to be appointed in his case.

Plaintiff also requests the Court appoint an expert in this case.

Federal Rules of Evidence 706(a) authorizes a court to appoint an expert

on its own motion or on the motion of any party. When the Court appoints

an expert, the cost is apportioned between the parties. Fed. R. Evid.

706(c)(2). 

Plaintiff contends the appointment of an expert on the use of force is

necessary “to avoid a wholly one sided presentation" by Defendants’ expert

witness Michael T. Picket. [Doc. No. 44, p. 2.] This, however, is not an

adequate basis for appointment under Rule 706(a). The role of a court

appointed expert is to serve as an independent neutral advisor in order to

enlighten the Court and the jury on issues that are excessively complex or

confusing. Plaintiff has not shown a need exists for such an expert, and

the issues in this case are not sufficiently complex as to necessitate the

appointment of a expert by the Court.

Plaintiff's intended use of the requested expert witness appears to be

more consistent with the typical usage of witnesses testifying pursuant to

Rules 702 - 705, which permit parties to proffer qualified expert testimony

in support of their claims or defenses. While the Court is cognizant of the

challenges an IFP litigant such as Plaintiff faces in retaining an expert

witness, the IFP statute does not grant the Court the authority to appoint

expert witnesses on behalf of a party. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915; See also

Pedraza v. Jones, 71 F.3d 194, 196 (5th Cir. 1995). As a general matter,

IFP litigants must hire their own experts. 

4

Case 3:11-cv-02534-BEN-JMA Document 45 Filed 09/25/13 Page 4 of 5
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

III. Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Motion Requesting Court Orders

for Deposition and Motion for Appointment of Counsel are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 25, 2013

Jan M. Adler

U.S. Magistrate Judge

5

Case 3:11-cv-02534-BEN-JMA Document 45 Filed 09/25/13 Page 5 of 5