Louie v. California Judicial Council

Full title: GEORGE S. LOUIE, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL COUNCIL, et al.…

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 8, 2011

NO. CIV. S-10-2530 LKK/EFB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)

Opinion

NO. CIV. S-10-2530 LKK/EFB.

September 8, 2011

ORDER

LAWRENCE KARLTON, Senior District Judge

Plaintiff has filed at least thirteen (13) federal ADA lawsuits in the Eastern District against various defendants. Plaintiff then went into bankruptcy, and the Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate took over the litigation of the cases. The Trustee now seeks an order referring this case to the Bankruptcy Court. In nine (9) of the other cases, the Trustee has the same motion pending for an order referring the case to the Bankruptcy Court: ¹

1 There appears to be no motion pending in 10-3188 FCD-CMK (no request for referral); 11-0883 KJM-GGH (hearing vacated); and 11-0886 MCE-JFM (no request for referral).

(1) 10-2106 JAM-KJN (9-16-2011 hearing; no response); (2) 10-2113 JAM-KJN (9-16-2011 hearing; no response); (3) 10-2366 JAM-KJN (9-16-2011 hearing; no response); (4) 10-2530 LKK-EFB (9-12-2011 hearing; no response); (5) 11-0074 JAM-EFB (10-5-2011 hearing; opposed); (6) 11-0107 JAM-CKD (9-16-2011 hearing; no response); (7) 11-0108 MCE-EFB (9-29-2011 hearing; no response); (8) 11-0882 JAM-EFB (10-5-2011 hearing; no response); (9) 11-0884 MCE-JFM (9-29-2011 hearing; no response); and (10) 11-0885 JAM-GGH (10-5-2011 hearing; no response). The above-referenced cases appear to be related, in that the deciding court or courts may need to decide common questions, including: (a) whether the cases should be referred to the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) and this District's General Orders; (b) if so, whether the cases should be referred for a proposed decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1), or for all proceedings to final judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(2); and (c) whether the lack of response suffices for "consent" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(2). It would therefore appear that relating the cases could avoid duplication of effort and unnecessary expenditure of scarce judicial resources.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Trustee shall comply with his obligations under Local E.D. Cal. R. 123(b), relating to Notices of Related Cases, no later than September 14, 2011.

2. Defendants, both of whom have answered the complaint, shall comply with their obligations under Local E.D. Cal. R. 230(c), to either oppose the Trustee's motion or file a Statement of Non-Opposition, no later than September 14, 2011.

3. The hearing on the Trustee's motion to refer the case to the Bankruptcy Court, currently scheduled for September 12, 2011, is hereby REMOVED from the calendar.

IT IS SO ORDERED.