Rodriguez v. Burnett

Opinion

DISTRICT OF NEW YORK , 22-cv-02193 (PMH) □ dg (0 Vaid aes La Rodriguez, Din # 1700928 | Sire dey AM Support OF

- Plaintiff PEAT ts py MOTION REQUEST FOR

Burnett.,et.,al Defendant

I Ralph Rodriguez, incarcerated individual Din # 17A0928, currently located at Correctional Facility, P.O Box 307, Beacon New York 12508, being Pro-Se and states the following as true and correct; Plaintiff ‘on June. 6, 2022. walTo the extent Plaintiff moves for the appointment of an expert witness ‘ |pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 706(a), that application is denied. Plaintiff has and the information provided gnot made a sufficient showing that appointment of an expert witness is necessary to prove his claims. indigent. To the extent Plaintiff seeks appointment of counsel, that application is A “Civil Case Discovery Plan Aidenied. Plaintiff may seek assistance from NYLAG, as explained in the Court's May 31, 2023 Order. (Doc. 39.) by Honorable Judge Philip M. Ha The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to (i) mail a copy of this Order to Attorney General currentilPlaintiff and (ii) terminate the motion sequences pending at Docs. 53 and 55. been made regarding discovery r SO ORDERED. On or about August. 21, 2023 was miled to plaintife, 1 Philip M. Halpern planning to have testify during tjUnited States District Judge This list of witnesses made by |Dated: White Plains, New York October 25, 2023 for plaintiff to rebut ti — an "Expert Witness" is needed by plaintiff. . . Plaintiff being ‘ro Se «ml -n incarcerated in‘ividual within the department of □ and has no experience with the federal laws involved, or the ability to an expect witness. . An expert witness is a person with “selentific, technical or other specialized =>

who are allowed to testify to their opinions on matters within their and many prison cases "cannot be won without the use of an expert see Beard v. Banks, 543US 521, 534, 126 S.Ct. 2572 (2006). An expert witness is vital to plaintiffs claim, dealing with issues involving and neurological which are confusing and conflicting, and can assist the and Jury in understanding these issues, see Walker v. American Home Shield Long Disability Plan, 180 F.3d 1065, 1071 (9th cir 1999). The appointment of in .xgert witness for trial or counsel to assist with pre-- pleadings would insure that plaintiffs case is not a wholly one-sided sentation by. the defendants on the issues pertaining to medical, see Steele v. 37 F 3d1266, 1271 (11th cir 1996). : The appointment of experts have been made or highly suggested by the Courts ina of prisoners cases, see Taylor v. Michigan Dep't of Corrections 69 F.3d %6, (6th cir 1995), Williams v. McKetthen 963 F.2d 70, 71-72 (Sth cic 1992), □

v. Anderson 924 F.2d 1500, 1510-11 (9th cir), and rulings have been rendered = District Courts Denials of Motion for an Expert Witness), when properly timely, see Spann v. Roper 453 F.3d 1007, 1008 (8th cir 2006). Plaintiffs claims include issues regarding the medical need for an egg erate and benefits of having one and the implications of denying a person medically to have one. —

plaintiff is in need of an expert witness to Antom the court and jury of discontinuation of another experts authorization for plaintif£ to have and the medical equipment authorized prior to the defendants direct deliberate to plaintiffs health by denying to continue treatment, and its effects □ one. □ Plaintiffs worsening of health due to this discontinuation and injuries □ by defendants actions in making plaintiff stand for a prelong period of against medical orders and after plaintiff was assaulted, . sustaining new

and what those new injuries was. . Claims regarding the denial of neurological madication, plaintiff was on prioc

denying such medication after injuries sustained required such

The deterioration of plaintiffs health due to the direct deliberate indifference □ . ALl medical issues any Lay person in the field of medical will find confusing conflicting, see Walker v. American Home Shield Long Term Disability Plan, 180 1071 (9th cir 1999). □□ Appointment of an expert witness is needed to rebut defendant witness Davacht M. . and appointment of an independent expert can be made by this Honorable see Rule 750(a) Fed.R.Evid.

Absent an expert witness and or Counsel to assist an indigent pro-se prisoner □□ lead to the dismissal of plaintiff case involving claims with merit, see Hannah 523 F.3d 597 (Sth cir 2008). This Honorable Court can also order that an expert witness be granted anid the can be held liable for the full payment of such experts needed, for plaintiff. see Rule 706(b) Fed.R.Evid, placing "no burden on the Court:

Factual issues that may merit the appointment of counsel include those requicing use of an expert witness, 3e@ Steele v. Shah 87 P.3d 1266, 1271 (11th cir 1996), ag many medical issues with claim. sce Greane v. Daley, 414 F.3d 645, 658 (7th 2095), and miltiple witness are being calles involvt ag conflictisg testimony, v. Hickman, 96 F Supo 24 572, 577-73(E.). tex2000). □

The issues involved in plaintiffs claims ace comlex enough to include the of the Eighth Amendment “Totality Of The Condition" standard, see Nilsson , 670 F.Supp 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y 1987), and the defendants qualified

defense, see LaFrance v. Rampone, 678 F.Supp 72. 73 (D.Vt.1933). There are also questions of the extent of prisoners rights unde. t34 Federal Stature: sce Flakes v. Frank, 322 F.Supp 2¢ 981, 983(W.D.WIS.2004)am' erminging whether a prison cegulation violates the Turner v. Safley "Reasonable Staniacd, see Abdullah v. Gunter, 949 F.2d 103?, 1035 (8th cir 1991). Furthermore medical cases frequently involve technical tasues that Pro-Se are unable ta deal with adequately and require the use of an Expert and or the Appointment of Counsel, see Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 155, cir 1993), and plaintiff has made multiple request to law firms ant for assistance and representation with no success, sending out three ters Last week alone. □□ plaintiff humbly request for all the reasons stated that an "Expert be granted or "Appointment of limlted Counsel", to assist pro-se indigent, to tha. law, whan: is incarcerated and claim ts complex, including igsues that complex and require assistance.

lO- 4-20 2y y Radha □ ished AMarseys Che, □ . x ‘ Ay Acer B cote Festa (urectine / A Wie Sol! WY locos CK 87 heuer AA 1288 Sutherr Domeh Guk Mo Je Dagpit bran PH : pearl Stee □ Mew Secle, MY 1007