Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Denton v. Pastor

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma

April 11, 2017

MICHAEL DENTON, Plaintiff,
v.
PASTOR, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge

         The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action filed by Plaintiff Michael Denton to United States Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. Plaintiff has filed two Motions to Request Funds for Legal Materials, Legal Books, and for Investigator to Interview Witnesses (“Motions for Funds”), a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (“Motion to Amend”), and a Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery (“Motion to Compel”). Dkt. 80, 85, 86, 89. After review of the relevant record, the Court denies the Motions for Funds (Dkt. 80, 85), grants the Motion to Amend (Dkt. 86), and denies the Motion to Compel (Dkt. 89). Plaintiff must file his second amended complaint on or before May 12, 2017. The Clerk is directed to re-note the pending Motions for Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. 52, 56, 72) to May 12, 2017.

         I. Motions for Funds (Dkt. 80, 85)

         Plaintiff filed two Motions for Funds requesting the Court provide him with monetary funds to pay for legal materials, legal books, and an investigator to interview witnesses. Dkt. 80, 85. Plaintiff contends Defendants are denying him access to necessary legal materials and, therefore, he is unable to litigate this case. Dkt. 80, 85. “The Supreme Court has declared 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, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989) (internal quotations omitted). “The federal courts have uniformly held that an indigent prisoner litigant must bear his own costs of litigation.” Hollis v. Sloan, 2012 WL 5304756, at *5 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2012). “Also, the in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for the appointment of an investigator.” Williams v. Schwarzenegger, 2009 WL 900049, at *8 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2009). As Plaintiff must bear his own costs of litigation, his Motions for Funds (Dkt. 80, 85) are denied.

         II. Motion to Amend (Dkt. 86)

         Plaintiff filed the Motion to Amend on March 20, 2017. Dkt. 86. Plaintiff seeks leave to amend his Amended Complaint because he found mistakes in the Amended Complaint after further investigation and the Amended Complaint contains errors in the Prayer for Relief. Id. Defendants did not file a response to Plaintiff's Motion to Amend. See generally Dkt.

         Pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

(1) Amending as a Matter of Course
A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within: (A) 21 days after serving it, or
(B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.
(2) Other Amendments
In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires.

         As Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint and the time has expired for filing an amendment as a matter of course, Plaintiff cannot amend pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1). See Dkt. 25, 26. To amend the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff must have Defendants' written consent or the Court's leave. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2).

         While Defendants have not provided Plaintiff with written consent, they have not filed any opposition to the Motion to Amend. Plaintiff seeks to correct errors in his Prayer for Relief and in other portions of his Amended Complaint. See Dkt. 86. As Plaintiff is seeking to correct deficiencies in his Amended Complaint, the Court finds justice requires Plaintiff be given leave to amend. See Eldridge v. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.