Filed: Sep. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 05, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE GARY S. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties to the above-entitled actions, by their respective counsel, that the actions be consolidated into one action for all purposes. The undersigned hereby jointly apply to the Court for an order Consolidating Action No. 1:13-CV-02085 with Action No. 1:13-cv-01506 and directing that only one judgment be made, that the original of all further papers filed in the above-
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE GARY S. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties to the above-entitled actions, by their respective counsel, that the actions be consolidated into one action for all purposes. The undersigned hereby jointly apply to the Court for an order Consolidating Action No. 1:13-CV-02085 with Action No. 1:13-cv-01506 and directing that only one judgment be made, that the original of all further papers filed in the above-e..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE
GARY S. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties to the above-entitled actions, by their respective counsel, that the actions be consolidated into one action for all purposes.
The undersigned hereby jointly apply to the Court for an order Consolidating Action No. 1:13-CV-02085 with Action No. 1:13-cv-01506 and directing that only one judgment be made, that the original of all further papers filed in the above-entitled actions be entitled Ramirez v. Jimenez, and filed in Action No. 1:13-CV-02085, and that a copy of such Order be filed in Action No. 1:13-cv-01506, but that no further papers or documents or copies thereof need to be filed in that action.
ORDER
Based on the above stipulation and an independent review of the facts, the Court orders consolidation of these cases. Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows:
Consolidation. When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated; and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a).
The purpose of consolidation under Rule 42(a) is to enhance trial court efficiency by avoiding unnecessary duplication of proceedings and effort. See Team Enterprises., LLC v. Western Inv. Real Estate Trust, 2008 WL 4712759 at *1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2008). Consolidation of cases also guards against the risk of inconsistent adjudications. Id. The Court has broad discretion to order consolidation of cases pending in the same district. See Investors Research Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court or Central Dist. of Cal., 877 F.2d 777 (9th Cir. 1989).
Here, both actions involve some of the same parties. Similarly, both actions raise essentially the same issues of fact and law as they both involve the same train accident. Consolidation will not only promote judicial efficiency, but it will prevent inconsistent outcomes and is not prejudicial to the parties. As such, consolidation is appropriate.
Based on the above, the Court ORDERS that:
1. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to consolidate National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Young's Commercial Transfer Inc., et al., Case Number 1:13-CV-1506-AWI-GSA with the related case Ramirezv. Jimenez, et al., Case Number 1:13-CV-2085-AWI-GSA. Insofar as Case Number 1:13-CV-1506-AWI-GSA was the first action filed with the court, it will be considered the lead case. The Clerk of the Court IS DIRECTED to close Case Number 1:13-CV-2085-AWI-GSA. The court will construe the consolidated cases as one action; and
2. The parties SHALL IDENTIFY all future pleadings by the case number of the lead case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
