Wilhoit v. Ohio Living

• Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
• Decided: May 16, 2023
• Docket: 2:22-cv-01962
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

BRIDGETT BOYD, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, :

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:22-cv-1962

Judge Sarah D. Morrison

v. Magistrate Judge Chelsey M.

Vascura

: OHIO LIVING, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Consolidate Cases for Settlement Approval. (ECF No. 48.) The parties ask the Court to consolidate this case with Kordie v. Ohio Living, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-3791, for the purposes of moving and obtaining approval of a global settlement that fully resolves both actions. (Id.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) provides that if 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.” The Rule affords trial courts discretion to consolidate cases that involve common questions of law or fact. Cantrell v. GAF Corp., 999 F.2d 1007, 1011 (6th Cir. 1993). “The underlying objective is to administer the court’s business ‘with expedition and economy while providing justice to the parties.’” Advey v. Celotex Corp., 962 F.2d 1177, 1180 (6th Cir. 1992) (quoting Wright & Miller, 9 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2381 (1971)); accord Wright & Miller, 9A Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2381 (3d ed. Apr. 2023 Update). This case and Kordie involve common questions of law and fact. Both cases

involve the same Defendants and the same counsel. The complaints contain similar allegations of violations of the FLSA and parallel state law statutes for unpaid overtime compensation. (Compare Kordie, ECF No. 1 with Boyd, ECF No. 24.) In their Joint Motion, the parties assert that in this matter and Kordie, they have “determined that a joint settlement of the actions [is] a cost effective and efficient approach to resolving the matters and ultimately reach[ing] a global resolution of all claims.” (ECF No. 48, PageID 204.) The parties also state that the

“terms of the settlement for both suits are inextricably intertwined” and consolidation will allow them to prepare a single motion for Court approval, avoid duplicative filings and unnecessary costs, and promote judicial economy. (Id.) The Joint Motion is well taken. The Court finds consolidation will promote judicial economy while providing justice to the parties. Thus, the Joint Motion is GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE this case. The parties are

ORDERED to file all documents in Kordie v. Ohio Living, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv- 3791.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Sarah D. Morrison SARAH D. MORRISON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE