Townsel v. Madera County Dept Probation et al

Filing 10

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES: Lead Case is 1:15-CV-00763-LJO-SAB, Member Case is 1:15-cv-00764-AWI-GSA; MEMBER CASE CLOSED; all future filings to be made in Lead Case, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/2/2015 Mark L. Duarte and Madera County Behavioral Health Services added. (Fahrney, E)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

DAVID TOWNSEL,

5

Plaintiff,

6

ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE CASES

7
8
9

v.
MADERA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
PROBATION and JENNIFER SWAINE,
Defendants.

10
11
12

DAVID TOWNSEL,
ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE CASES
Plaintiff,

14

16
17

1:15-cv-764 AWI-GSA

_______________________________

13

15

1:15-cv-763 LJO-SAB

v.
MADERA COUNTY BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH SERVICES and MARK
DUARTE,

18
19

Defendants.

20
21
22

Plaintiff, David Townsel, filed a complaint in Townsel v. Madera County Probation, et al.,
1:15-cv-763 LJO-SAB on May 19, 2015, and another complaint that same day in Townsel v. Madera

23

County Behavioral Health Services et al. 1:15-cv-764 AWI-GSA. Both of the cases involve

24

Plaintiff’s allegations of misconduct related to a violation of probation.

25
26
27

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42 provides that “[i]f actions before the court involve a
common question of law or fact, the court may . . . consolidate the actions. . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42
(a)(2). “The district court has broad discretion under this rule to consolidate cases pending in the

28
1

1

same district.” Investors Research Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for Cent. Dist. of California, 877 F.2d

2

777 (9th Cir. 1989). In determining whether to consolidate cases, a court should balance the

3

interest of judicial convenience against “any inconvenience, delay, or expense that it would

4

cause.” Huene v. United States, 743 F. 2d 703, 704 (9th Cir. 1984).

5
6

These actions contain common questions of fact and law. Therefore, the Court finds that

7

consolidation will aid in judicial efficiency and that consolidation will not cause delay, confusion,

8

or prejudice.

9
10
11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Clerk’s Office is directed to consolidate Townsel v. Madera County Probation, et
al., No. 1:15-cv-763-LJO-SAB and Townsel v. Madera County Behavioral Health
Services et al., No. 1:15-cv-764-AWI-GSA;

12
13
14
15

2. Townsel v. Madera County Probation et al., No. 1:15-cv-763-LJO-SAB shall be
designated as the lead case; and

3. The parties are instructed to file all documents in Townsel v. Madera County Probation
et al, 1:15-cv-763-LJO-SAB. Documents not filed in the lead case may not be
considered.

16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

July 2, 2015

20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2