Ovella v. B&C Constr. & Equipment, LLC

Full title: DOMINIC OVELLA PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT v. B&C CONSTRUCTION AND…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 25, 2012

CAUSE NO. 1:10CV285 LG-RHW (S.D. Miss. Jan. 25, 2012)

Opinion

CAUSE NO. 1:10CV285 LG-RHW

01-25-2012

DOMINIC OVELLA PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT v. B&C CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT, LLC, COLIE DONALDSON, BETH ANNE DONALDSON, ALLEN M. YOUNG, and YOUNG ENGINEERING SERVICES DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-CLAIMANTS/THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS v. KATHY OVELLA THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT

Louis Guirola

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE

AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE

BEFORE THE COURT are: 1) the Motion to Consolidate [359] filed by Defendants/Counter-Claimants/Third-Party Plaintiffs, Colie Donaldson, B&C Construction and Equipment, LLC, Beth Anne Donaldson and Coby Donaldson; and 2) the Motion to Continue Trial Date [360] filed by Plaintiff Dominic J. Ovella and Third-Party Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Kathleen H. Ovella.

The B&C Construction parties request that this case be consolidated with a case they filed in this court on January 12, 2012; Cause No. 1:12cv7-HSO-RHW. According to B&C, the claims in the new lawsuit are almost identical to the counter and third-party claims they made in this suit. The only difference is that B&C Construction has attached a newly-obtained Residential Builder License to the new complaint. The Ovellas object to consolidation for the obvious reason that this case is ready for trial, whereas the new case is in the very earliest stages. Consideration of the issues presented by the new case would significantly impact the progress of this case. Anticipating that the cases will be consolidated, the Ovellas request a continuance of the trial date. They argue they must be given an opportunity to conduct discovery and seek dismissal of the new claims on the grounds of statute of limitations and res judicata.

The issues have been fully briefed on an abbreviated schedule due to the impending trial date. After due consideration of the arguments of counsel and the record in this case, the Court finds that both motions should be denied. The interests of economy and efficiency will be best served by allowing this case to proceed to trial as scheduled.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Consolidate [359] filed by Defendants/Counter-Claimants/Third-Party Plaintiffs, Colie Donaldson, B)C Construction and Equipment, LLC, Beth Anne Donaldson and Coby Donaldson, is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Continue Trial Date [360] filed by Plaintiff Dominic J. Ovella and Third-Party Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Kathleen H. Ovella, is DENIED.

____________

Louis Guirola, Jr.

Chief United States District Judge