Cushenberry v. LeBlanc, 17-402-BAJ-EWD. (2019)
Court: District Court, M.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20190903d70
Visitors: 6
Filed: Aug. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER ERIN WILDER-DOOMES , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is a "Motion to Incorporate," 1 which seeks consolidation of the instant matter with Lewis v. Cain, 2 a class action pending before this Court. A bench trial in Lewis v. Cain concluded on October 25, 2018. 3 At the conclusion of trial, the parties were ordered to schedule a mediation, 4 which was conducted on July 24, 2019. 5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "If actions before
Summary: ORDER ERIN WILDER-DOOMES , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is a "Motion to Incorporate," 1 which seeks consolidation of the instant matter with Lewis v. Cain, 2 a class action pending before this Court. A bench trial in Lewis v. Cain concluded on October 25, 2018. 3 At the conclusion of trial, the parties were ordered to schedule a mediation, 4 which was conducted on July 24, 2019. 5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "If actions before ..
More
ORDER
ERIN WILDER-DOOMES, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is a "Motion to Incorporate,"1 which seeks consolidation of the instant matter with Lewis v. Cain,2 a class action pending before this Court. A bench trial in Lewis v. Cain concluded on October 25, 2018.3 At the conclusion of trial, the parties were ordered to schedule a mediation,4 which was conducted on July 24, 2019.5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may: (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions...." The trial in Lewis v. Cain has already taken place. Thus, Plaintiff's action cannot be consolidated into Lewis v. Cain, as it has, for all intents and purposes, concluded, and allowing consolidation of this action with Lewis v. Cain would cause unnecessary cost and delay, which is contrary to the purpose of Rule 42.6 Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Incorporate7 be and is hereby DENIED.
FootNotes
1. R. Doc. 86.
2. Civil Action No. 15-318 (M.D. La.).
3. Id. at R. Doc. 536.
4. Id. at R. Doc. 536.
5. Id. at R. Doc. 562.
6. Rule 42 further provides that actions may be consolidated "to avoid unnecessary cost or delay." To the extent Plaintiff seeks to be a member of the class defined in Lewis v. Cain, he already is. The Class includes "all inmates who now, or will be in the future, incarcerated at LSP." Since Plaintiff is incarcerated at LSP, he is already included in the class defined in Lewis v. Cain. See Lewis v. Cain, Civil Action No. 15-318 (M.D. La.) at R. Doc. 394, p. 30.
7. R. Doc. 86.
Source: Leagle
