Opinion
CASE NO. 4:12cv247-RH/CAS CASE NO. 4:12cv452-RH/CAS CASE NO. 4:12cv529-RH/CAS
04-11-2013
MAINLINE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. TAD C. NORTHCOTT et al., Defendant. MAINLINE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. BRIAN T. HAMILL et al., Defendants. MAINLINE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. DAVID M. SCHAFER et al., Defendants.
ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES FOR
CASE-MANAGEMENT PURPOSES
The plaintiff has moved to consolidate these three cases. The defendants oppose the motion, noting that not all issues in all three cases are identical.
Joinder of parties and claims is not limited to identical issues. To the contrary, the rules promote consolidated handling when there are common issues that efficiently can be handled together, without prejudice to any party. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 18, 19, 20 & 42. The defendants assert they will be prejudiced by consolidated handling of these claims, but with competent case management, that will not be so.
This order consolidates the cases for case-management purposes. It is likely but not certain that all claims among all parties will be tried together, either with any nonjury issues submitted to an advisory jury—the same jury that will try the jury issues—or with nonjury issues resolved by the court based on both the evidence presented at the jury trial and any additional evidence.
The plaintiff should note: these cases are set for trial on November 4, 2013. The deadline for moving for leave to amend is June 3, 2013, but if the plaintiff intends to add additional claims or defendants, it should do so promptly. Any new defendant will be entitled to adequate time to prepare. Having successfully sought consolidation, the plaintiff ought not itself create a delay that requires separate trials against separate defendants. Trial of the claims that are already pending will not be delayed.
For these reasons,
IT IS ORDERED:
The pending motions to consolidate are GRANTED IN PART. These cases are consolidated for case-management purposes and will be maintained on a common docket under Consolidated Case No. 4:12cv247. Every filing—other than a complaint (or counterclaim or third-party complaint), answer, judgment, notice of appeal, or motion to amend or amended version of any of them—that is applicable to any case must be filed in the common docket and must not be filed separately in any other case. Every filing—other than a complaint (or counterclaim or third-party complaint), answer, judgment, notice of appeal, or amended version of any of them—that is filed in the common docket will be deemed filed in every case.
Robert L. Hinkle
United States District Judge