United States of America v. Real property located at 149 G Street, Lincoln, California, Placer County, APN: 008-266-015-000 et al

Filing 76

NON-RELATED CASE ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 11/30/2012. Court is DENYING the 67 Notice of Related Cases without prejudice to it being brought at a later date. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

MECHANICS BANK, a California
banking corporation,
Plaintiff,

13
v.

14
15
16

VOLEN PROPERTIES 10, LLC, a
California limited liability corporation,
and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive,
Defendants.

17
18

UNITED STATE OF AMERICA,

23

NON-RELATED CASE ORDER

v.

20

22

No. 2:12-cv-00705-MCE-DAD

Plaintiff,

19

21

No. 2:12-cv-02553-KJM-EFB

REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 149
G STREET, LINCOLN, CALIFORNIA,
PLACER COUNTY, APN 008—015000 INCLUDING ALL
APPURTENANCES AND
IMPROVEMENTS THERETO, et al.,

24

Defendants.

25
26

///

27

///

28
1

1

On November 13, 2012, Volen Properties 10, LLC filed a Notice of Related Case.

2

(ECF No. 67.) Through that notice, Volen Properties seeks to relate Case No. 2:12-cv-

3

02553-KJM-EFB, a receivership action (“Receivership Action”) pending before Judge

4

Mueller, and Case No. 2:12-cv-00705-MCE-DAD, a forfeiture action (“Forfeiture Action”)

5

filed by the United States pending before this Court. Mechanics Bank filed an objection

6

to the Notice of Related Cases. (ECF No. 73.)

7

The Receivership Action, initiated by Mechanics Bank, seeks the placement of a

8

receiver on the real property located at 8928 Volunteer Lane, Sacramento, APN 078-

9

0450-026-0000. The Forfeiture Action, initiated by the Government, includes as a

10

defendant property the real property located at 8928 Volunteer Lane, Sacramento, APN

11

078-0450-026-0000.

12

Local Rule 123(a) defines “Related Cases” as follows:

13

An action is related to another within the meaning of this Rule when
(1) both actions involve the same parties and are based on the same or a
similar claim;
(2) both actions involve the same property, transaction, or event;
(3) both actions involve similar questions of fact and the same questions of
law and their assignment to the same Judge or Magistrate Judge is likely to
effect a substantial savings of judicial effort, either because the same result
should follow in both actions or otherwise; or
(4) for any other reasons, it would entail substantial duplication of labor if
the actions were heard by different Judges or Magistrate Judges.

14
15
16
17
18
19

While the cases clearly involve the same real property, the Court finds that the

20

purposes underlying Local Rule 123(a)—namely, avoiding substantial duplication of

21

labor and conflicting decisions where the same set of facts and law apply—are not

22

present in these cases at this time, such that they compel the Court to relate the two

23

cases. That is, it is not readily apparent that the two separate cases will entail

24

substantial duplication of labor such that the cases should not be related, nor does it

25

appear that there are any potentially conflicting decisions that require the Court to relate

26

the cases.

27

///

28

///
2

1
2

Accordingly, the Court DENIES the Notice of Related Cases WITHOUT
PREJUDICE to this Notice being brought again at a later date.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5

Dated: November 30, 2012
__________________________________
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6
7
8
9

DEAC_Signature-END:

10
11

c4d6b0d3

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3