Perez v. Osceola, City of et al

Filing 13

ORDER determining that consolidation of case 3:14-cv-00066 with 3:14-cv-00070 is appropriate. Defendants' 11 Motion for Consolidation is granted. The first filed case is designated as the lead case and all pleadings should be filed in that case. 19 Motion to Amend and 21 Motion for Settlement denied. 23 Motion to Consolidate denied as moot; 20 Motion for Leave to Depose is granted. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 6/17/2014.(jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
TOMMY PEREZ, JR.
v.

PLAINTIFF
CASE NO. 3:14CV00066 BSM

CITY OF OSCEOLA, et. al

DEFENDANTS

TOMMY PEREZ, JR.
v.

PLAINTIFF
CASE NO. 3:14CV00070 KGB

CITY OF OSCEOLA, et. al

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Plaintiff Tommy Perez, Jr. filed this lawsuit pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. [Doc.
No.1]. Five days later, Perez filed another pro se complaint alleging related conduct by three
of the same defendants. See Perez v. Osceola et al., Case No. 3:14CV00070.
Having reviewed the allegations in these two cases, it is determined that consolidation
is appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a), and the defendants’ motion for consolidation [Case
No. 3:14CV00066, Doc. No. 11] is granted. In accordance with the practice in the Eastern
District of Arkansas, the first-filed case, Perez v. City of Osceola et al., Case No.
3:14CV00066, is designated as the lead case. All pleadings should be filed in that case.
Additionally, Perez’s motion to amend [Doc. No. 19] and his motion for settlement
[Doc. No. 21] are denied. His motion to consolidate [Doc. No. 23] is denied as moot.
Defendants’ motion for leave to depose Perez [Doc. No. 20] is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of June 2014.

________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2