Gonzalez v. Corrections Corporation of America

E.D. California

Gonzalez v. Corrections Corporation of America

District Court, E.D. California·Decided August 9, 2019·No. 1:16-cv-01891·Unknown

Opinion

JOSE GONZALEZ, No. 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT Plaintiff, v. CORECIVIC OF TENNESSEE, LLC, et al., Defendants. THOMAS RICHARDS, No. 1:17-cv-01094-LJO-JLT Plaintiff, (New Case No. 1:17-cv-1094-DAD-JLT) v. CORECIVIC OF TENNESSEE, LLC, ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES Defendant. Before the court is the parties’ stipulation to consolidate the following cases: • Gonzalez v. CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC, et al. (No. 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT); and • Richards v. CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC, (No. 1:17-cv-01094-LJO-JLT). (Case No. 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT, Doc. No. 63.) Pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[i]f actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may: (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions; (2) consolidate the actions; or (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay.” In exercising its discretion, the court “weighs the saving of time and effort consolidation would produce against any inconvenience, delay, or expense that it would cause.” Huene v. United States, 743 F.2d 703, 704 (9th Cir. 1984). Here, the court finds that the above-captioned actions involve the same or similar parties, claims, and questions of fact or law, and that consolidation will avoid unnecessary costs and duplication of proceedings. Thus, good cause exists to consolidate these cases and to re-assign Case No. 1:17-cv-01094-LJO-JLT to the undersigned. Accordingly, 1. The above-referenced cases shall be consolidated for all purposes, including trial, pursuant to Rule 42(a); 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file this order in each of the above-referenced cases; and 3. Going forward, the parties and the Clerk of the Court are directed to file documents under only the lead case number. Future captions should indicate the lead case number followed by the member case number as follows: Lead Case: 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT Member Case: 1:17-cv-01094-DAD-JLT IT IS SO ORDERED. me □ Dated: _ August 8, 2019 Yel A Load UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOSE GONZALEZ, No. 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT Plaintiff, v. CORECIVIC OF TENNESSEE, LLC, et al., Defendants. THOMAS RICHARDS, No. 1:17-cv-01094-LJO-JLT Plaintiff, (New Case No. 1:17-cv-1094-DAD-JLT) v. CORECIVIC OF TENNESSEE, LLC, ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES Defendant. Before the court is the parties’ stipulation to consolidate the following cases: • Gonzalez v. CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC, et al. (No. 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT); and • Richards v. CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC, (No. 1:17-cv-01094-LJO-JLT). (Case No. 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT, Doc. No. 63.) Pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[i]f actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may: (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions; (2) consolidate the actions; or (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay.” In exercising its discretion, the court “weighs the saving of time and effort consolidation would produce against any inconvenience, delay, or expense that it would cause.” Huene v. United States, 743 F.2d 703, 704 (9th Cir. 1984). Here, the court finds that the above-captioned actions involve the same or similar parties, claims, and questions of fact or law, and that consolidation will avoid unnecessary costs and duplication of proceedings. Thus, good cause exists to consolidate these cases and to re-assign Case No. 1:17-cv-01094-LJO-JLT to the undersigned. Accordingly, 1. The above-referenced cases shall be consolidated for all purposes, including trial, pursuant to Rule 42(a); 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file this order in each of the above-referenced cases; and 3. Going forward, the parties and the Clerk of the Court are directed to file documents under only the lead case number. Future captions should indicate the lead case number followed by the member case number as follows: Lead Case: 1:16-cv-01891-DAD-JLT Member Case: 1:17-cv-01094-DAD-JLT IT IS SO ORDERED. me □ Dated: _ August 8, 2019 Yel A Load UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Gonzalez v. Corrections Corporation of America, (E.D. Cal. 2019).

Pincite

Gonzalez v. Corrections Corporation of America (Gonzalez v. Corrections Corporation of America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related