Lucas

Lucas v. Judge Advocate General

Good Law
243 F. App'x 324
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 21, 2007No. 07-55085California292 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

David Lucas (Lucas), appeals pro se the district court’s denial of a petition he described as a “Petition for Rule 27 PreAction Discovery,” seeking the results of a DNA test allegedly performed by the Navy in 1989. The district court denied *325 relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s decision to grant or deny a petition under Rule 27 for an abuse of discretion. See Campbell v. Blodgett, 982 F.2d 1356, 1358 (9th Cir.1993). We affirm.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27 permits the district courts to authorize the perpetuation of testimony prior to the commencement of a legal action if the petitioner can first establish that he “expects, to be a party to an action cognizable in a court of the United States but is presently unable to bring it or cause it to be brought.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 27(a)(1). Rule 27 also requires:

Fed.R.Civ.P. 27(a)(1).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Lucas’s Rule 27 petition. Lucas failed to request the perpetuation of testimony. Instead, he requested documents and test results. Rule 27, by its terms, does not authorize such a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.