From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sprague v. Michaels Stores, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 14, 2014
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00808-CMA-CBS (D. Colo. May. 14, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 14-cv-00808-CMA-CBS Civil Action No. 14-cv-01025-CMA-CBS

05-14-2014

BILLIE SPRAGUE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAELS STORES, INC., a Delaware corporation, THE GERSON COMPANY, a Missouri corporation, and THE GERSON COMPANIES, a Missouri corporation, Defendants.


Judge Christine M. Arguello


ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Consolidated Identical Actions (Doc. # 27).

The determination whether to consolidate cases is governed by Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides, pertinently:

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). This rule allows the court "to decide how cases on its docket are to be tried so that the business of the court may be dispatched with expedition and economy while providing justice to the parties." Breaux v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co., 220 F.R.D. 366, 367 (D. Colo. 2004) (quoting 9 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2381 at 427 (2nd ed. 1995)). The decision whether to consolidate cases is committed to this Court's sound discretion. Shump v. Balka, 574 F.2d 1341, 1344 (10th Cir. 1978).

The district judge to whom the oldest numbered case involved in the proposed consolidation is assigned determines whether consolidation is proper. See D.C.COLO.LCivR 42.1.

It is clear that common questions of law and fact are so similar in these two cases such that consolidation will be appropriate and efficacious.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion To Consolidate (Doc. # 27) is GRANTED;

2. That pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 42.1, Civil Action No. 14-cv-01025-REB-BNB is REASSIGNED to Judge Christine M. Arguello and Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer, and shall bear Civil Action No. 14-cv-01025-CMA-CBS;

3. That pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(2) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 42.1, Civil Action No. 14-cv-01025-CMA-CBS is CONSOLIDATED with Civil Action No. 14-cv-00808-CMA-CBS for all purposes;

4. That all future filings in these consolidated actions shall be captioned as set forth above.

BY THE COURT:

__________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Sprague v. Michaels Stores, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 14, 2014
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00808-CMA-CBS (D. Colo. May. 14, 2014)
Case details for

Sprague v. Michaels Stores, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BILLIE SPRAGUE, Plaintiff, v. MICHAELS STORES, INC., a Delaware…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: May 14, 2014

Citations

Civil Action No. 14-cv-00808-CMA-CBS (D. Colo. May. 14, 2014)