Day 050715 v. Ryan
This text of Day 050715 v. Ryan (Day 050715 v. Ryan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
9 Terry D Day, No. CV-17-00774-PHX-JAT
10 Plaintiff, ORDER
11 v.
12 Michael Dicks,
13 Defendant. 14 15 IT IS ORDERED setting a hearing on Plaintiff’s motion for subpoenas for trial 16 witnesses and Defendant’s response (Docs. 107, 112, 114, and 115) for Wednesday, 17 November 13, 2019, at 2:30 p.m. Defendant shall arrange for Plaintiff’s telephonic 18 appearance at this hearing by having Plaintiff call into the Court at 602-322-7560 at the 19 time set for the hearing. 20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff 13 21 blank subpoena forms for the non-inmate witnesses. Plaintiff must return these completed 22 forms to the Clerk of the Court by November 4, 2019. The Clerk of the Court shall not 23 forward these subpoenas to the Marshals for service without a further order from this Court. 24 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a supplemental brief by 25 November 4, 2019 regarding Plaintiff’s intention/ability to pay the required witness fees. 26 In his reply Plaintiff says, “all fees and costs could and should be added to the costs plaintiff 27 has been forced to incur by the bringing of this action.” (Doc. 115 at 3). There is no 28 running tab with the Court to which to add expenses. Witness fees are paid to the witnesses directly, not to the Court or Defendant Dicks. Accordingly, Plaintiffs brief must evidence 2|| an ability/intention to pay the required fees for the third-party witnesses or Plaintiff may 3 || submit the required funds contemporaneous to returning each subpoena. See generally 28 U.S.C. § 1821; Jenkins v. Perry, 2010 WL 2302546, at *2 (E.D. Cal. June 7, 2010); Tedder 5|| v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989); Salerno v. Arizona Dep’t of Corrections, || CV 13-2250-PHX-ROS (D. Ariz. April 25, 2016) (quoting Jackson v. Russel, 122 F. Supp. 7\| 3d 199, 200 (D. Del. 2015) (‘Federal courts are not authorized to waive or pay witness fees 8 || for indigent litigants and an inmate proceeding in forma pauperis in a civil action may not issue subpoenas without paying the required fees.”’)). 10 Dated this 17th day of October, 2019. 11 12 a 13 14 _ James A. Teil Org Senior United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
_2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Day 050715 v. Ryan, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/day-050715-v-ryan-azd-2019.