Kennedy v. HDBF, LLC et al

Filing 47

ORDER adopting 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint filed by Patricia Kennedy. Objection at Doc. 17 is overruled.Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint in this case by May 12, 2017, that asserts only the claims she pursues j ointly against Holly Hill and China Star.The Clerk of Court shall advise chambers when the severed claims are filed as new cases so that the Court may consider whether to consolidate all cases filed pursuant to this Order before the same District Judge and Magistrate Judge. Signed by Judge Gregory A. Presnell on 5/2/2017. (TKW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
PATRICIA KENNEDY,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 6:17-cv-488-Orl-31KRS

HDBF, LLC, CHINA STAR OF
DAYTONA, INC., FAMILY DOLLAR
STORES OF FLORIDA, LLC, PHAM
BICH, QS DAYTONA, LLC, PULL II,
INC. and WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC.,
Defendants.

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Objection (Doc. 17) to the Report and
Recommendation of Judge Spaulding (Doc. 11).
In her Report, Judge Spaulding recommended that Plaintiff’s claims be severed into seven
separate lawsuits. This recommendation is based on her conclusion that joinder under Rule
20(a)(2)(A) is not warranted because all of these claims do not arise out of the same transaction,
occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences, and because in any event, joinder would
create the potential for prejudice, expense, or delay.
After de novo review, the Court concurs with the Report and Recommendation. It is,
therefore
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s objection is overruled and the Report and Recommendation of
Judge Spaulding is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as a part of this Order.
In accordance with the Report and Recommendation, it is further ORDERED that:
(1) This case is severed into separate lawsuits, as specified below, with the claims Plaintiff
asserts jointly against Holly Hill and China Star remaining in the instant case;
(2) Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint in this case by May 12, 2017, that asserts only

the claims she pursues jointly against Holly Hill and China Star;
(3) If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with the remainder of her claims, she must file separate
actions and pay the filing fee for each new case. If Plaintiff continues to assert the
claims alleged in the current complaint, the separate actions should be filed as follows:
a. One action asserting the claims she pursues jointly against Holly Hill and Family
Dollar;
b. One action asserting the claims she pursues jointly against Holly Hill and Bich;
c. One action asserting the claims she pursues jointly against Holly Hill and QS
Daytona;
d. One action asserting the claims she pursues jointly against Holly Hill and Pull II;
e. One action asserting the claims she pursues jointly against Holly Hill and WinnDixie; and
f. One action asserting only the claims for which Holly Hill is solely liable (the
parking violations identified in Paragraph 36(a)-(e) of the current complaint).
(4) The Clerk of Court shall advise chambers when the severed claims are filed as new
cases so that the Court may consider whether to consolidate all cases filed pursuant to
this Order before the same District Judge and Magistrate Judge.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, Orlando, Florida on May 2, 2017.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Party
-2-