Opinion
CV 12-00129-PHX-FJM CV 12-01643-PHX-NVW
08-23-2012
Sandra Todd, Plaintiff, v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp.; Chase Home Finance LLC; Chase Fulfillment Services, Defendants. Sandra Todd, Plaintiff, v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.; Cal-Western Reconveyance Corp.; United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Defendants.
WO
ORDER
The court has before it defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s ("Chase") motion to consolidate (doc. 42). The motion is not fully briefed.
Chase seeks to consolidate a second action recently filed by plaintiff Sandra Todd and removed to this court. Chase argues that the second action, which also challenges the legality of the 2010 Trustee's Sale of plaintiff's home, is appropriate for consolidation with this action. We may consolidate cases when they involve a "common question of law or fact." Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). However, we have granted a motion to dismiss the remaining breach of contract claim. This action, accordingly, is already at an end. Judicial economy would not be served by consolidation of a newly-filed action with one that has already reached a conclusion. Moreover, although both actions revolve around a challenge to the Trustee's Sale, the newly-filed action asserts claims of fraud and racketeering. These claims will likely raise new issues of law and fact not previously considered by this Court. In sum, we conclude that consolidation of these cases is neither judicially efficient nor necessary.
IT IS ORDERED DENYING defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s ("Chase") motion to consolidate (doc. 42).
___________
Frederick J. Martone
United States District Judge