ABDEL-JABOR MALIK, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS L. LAVALLEY, CORRECTIONS OFFICER, OFFICER BUCKLY, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Federal courts are not authorized to waive or pay witness fees for litigants proceeding in forma pauperis.
A pro se litigant, proceeding in forma pauperis, sued corrections officers for excessive force. The trial court dismissed the complaint after a bench …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Witness Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Abdel-Jabor Malik is a pro se civil litigant who has been granted in forma pauperis status in this litigation. His complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two corrections officers for excessive use of force was dismissed after a bench trial and judgment was entered on December 15, 1992. On appeal, Malik’s principal argument is that the magistrate judge should have secured the attendance at trial of two witnesses because Malik was unable to do so himself. The court refused to pay the necessary witness fees, even though Malik was proceeding in forma pau-peris.
We affirm the judgment of the district court and write in order to bring this Circuit in line with the various other circuits that have held that federal courts are not authorized to waive or pay witness fees on behalf of an in forma pauperis litigant. See, e.g., Tedder v. Odel, 890 F. 2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir.1989) (per curiam); Boring v. Kozakiewicz, 833 F. 2d 468, 474 (3d Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 991, 108 S.Ct. 1298, 99 L.Ed.2d 508 (1988); McNeil v. Lowney, 831 F. 2d 1368, 1373 (7th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 965, 108 S.Ct. 1236, 99 L.Ed.2d 435 (1988); Cookish v. Cunningham, 787 F. 2d 1, 5 (1st Cir.1986) (per curiam); United States Marshals Service v. Means, 741 F. 2d 1053, 1056-57 (8th Cir.1984); Johnson v. Hubbard, 698 F. 2d 286, 289-90 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 917, 104 S.Ct. 282, 78 L.Ed.2d 260 (1983). We agree with our sister circuits that no reading of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 supports the contention that Congress authorized the federal courts to waive or pay for Malik’s witness fees.
The Supreme Court has written in the context of indigent litigants that “the expenditure of public funds is proper only when authorized by Congress.” United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321, 96 S.Ct. 2086, 2089, 48 L.Ed.2d 666 (1976). Because Congress has not authorized courts to pay an indigent litigant’s witness fees, the district court did not err by refusing to pay Malik’s.
We have considered Malik’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (12 total)
- United States v. MacCOLLOM, 426 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1976)
- Leycock v. Gov't of the Virgin Islands, 464 U.S. 917 (U.S. 1983)
- Parker v. United States, 485 U.S. 991 (U.S. 1988)
- Tobias v. United States, 485 U.S. 991 (U.S. 1988)
- Cookish v. Cunningham, 787 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1986)
- United States Marshals Serv. v. Means, 741 F.2d 1053 (8th Cir. 1984)
- Johnson v. Hubbard, 698 F.2d 286 (6th Cir. 1983)
- Boring v. Kozakiewicz, 833 F.2d 468 (3d Cir. 1987)
- McNEIL v. Lowney, 831 F.2d 1368 (7th Cir. 1987)
- Stincer v. Kentucky, 485 U.S. 965 (U.S. 1988)