IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
September 7, 2006
CLIFTON WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF,
C/O ROWLAND, SGT. CHILDERS, SGT. ALBERT, C/O HOLDER, AND C/O HALL, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is plaintiff's Motion Requesting the Court for Oral Depositions of Witnesses and Defendant by Tape Recording. (Doc. 49). Defendants have filed a response in opposition. (Doc. 52).
Plaintiff seeks an order requiring that certain witnesses, including persons who are not parties, appear at Western Illinois Correctional Center for deposition. He asks that the depositions be tape recorded.
FEd.R.Civ.P. 30 provides the procedure for taking depositions. Parties can be compelled to appear for deposition by notice. Nonparty witnesses can be compelled to appear by subpoenas accompanied by the appropriate witness fees. Unless the parties agree otherwise, depositions must be taken before a person authorized to administer oaths. Further, "the party taking the deposition shall bear the cost of the recording." Rule 30(b)(2).
Defendants state in their response that they will cooperate with plaintiff in making arrangements for depositions, but they point out that plaintiff must pay the expenses thereof. They are correct. Plaintiff's right to access the courts does not grant him a right to have the defendants or the public pay for the costs of his litigation; "there is no right of subsidized access." Johnson v. Daley, 339 F.3d 582, 586 (7th Cir. 2003). Likewise, the fact that plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis does not mean that he is relieved of the burden of paying his own litigation expenses. McNeil v. Lowney, 831 F.2d 1368, 1373 (7th Cir. 1987).
Upon consideration and for good cause shown, plaintiff's Motion Requesting the Court for Oral Depositions of Witnesses and Defendant by Tape Recording (Doc. 49) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLIFFORD J. PROUD U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.