JENKINS v. CENTURION HEALTH

• Court: District Court, S.D. Indiana
• Decided: September 9, 2024
• Docket: 1:24-cv-00591
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

ALAN W. JENKINS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:24-cv-00591-JPH-TAB ) CENTURION HEALTH, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

Order Denying Motion to Appoint Expert

Plaintiff Alan Jenkins alleges in this case that he was denied necessary care for an eye condition, which caused him pain and vision loss. He moves the Court to appoint an expert under Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. In support, Mr. Jenkins explains that his claims are complex, and the medical terms used to describe his eye damage are beyond his expertise. He states that he can explain only the pain and vision impairment he has experienced. Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence allows appointment of a neutral expert witness if the Court determines that such an expert is necessary to help the trier of fact understand complex information. See Kennedy v. Huibregtse, 831 F.3d 441, 443 (7th Cir. 2016); Ledford v. Sullivan, 105 F.3d 354, 358-59 (7th Cir. 1997). To the extent that Mr. Jenkins seeks an expert to present his position, this is not intended by Rule 706(a). The purpose of this Rule is to allow the Court to obtain neutral expert testimony when "scientific or specialized knowledge will help the court to understand the evidence or decide a disputed fact." Elcock v. Davidson, 561 F. App'x 519, 524 (7th Cir. 2014). The Court, however, "need not appoint an expert for a party's own benefit or to explain symptoms that can be understood by a layperson|[.]". Turner v. Cox, 569 App'x 463, 468 (7th Cir. 2014) (citations omitted). At this early stage of the case, Mr. Jenkins has not shown that expert testimony is necessary to explain his symptoms. As he has stated, Mr. Jenkins will be able to explain his experiences and the treatment he has received. Accordingly, the motion for a court-appointed expert, dkt. [25], is DENIED. As the case progresses, if the Court determines that expert testimony is necessary to understand Mr. Jenkins's claims, it may reconsider this ruling. SO ORDERED.

Date: 9/9/2024 S) ards Patrick banter James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana Distribution: All ECF-registered counsel of record via email ALAN W. JENKINS 870097 PENDLETON - CF PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY