Green v. Hooks et al

Filing 38

ORDER granting 31 Motion to Consolidate Cases. CV614-46 consolidated with CV614-103. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 11/4/14. (bcw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION
DARIUS ISHUN GREEN,
Plaintiff,
V

both parties consent to the consolidation of
these cases. ECF No. 31 at 4.
Therefore, the Court GRANTS Green's
motion to consolidate, ECF No. 31. The
clerk is DIRECTED to consolidate this
case, 6:14-cv-46, with Green's other action,
6:14-cv-103.

6: 14-cv-46

.

This

WARDEN BRAD HOOKS, et al.,

e

ay of November 2014.

Defendants.
[STU.11I
Plaintiff Darius Green has filed a motion
to consolidate this case with another case,
Darius Ishun Green v. Charles Calhoun, et
al., 6:14-cv-103. ECF No. 31.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42
permits the consolidation of actions before
the court if they involve a common question
of law or fact. Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). The
Eleventh Circuit has encouraged trial courts
to make use of Rule 42(a) "in order to
expedite the trial and eliminate unnecessary
repetition and confusion." Hendrix v.
Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., 776 F.2d 1492,
1495 (11th Cir. 1985) (quoting Dupont v. S.
Pac. Co., 366 F.2d 193, 195 (5th Cir.
1966)).
After examining each of the complaints
filed, the Court finds that the alleged facts
are the same, and it appears that the cases
will involve the same issues of law. Thus,
consolidating these actions would eliminate
unnecessary repetition and confusion,
particularly during discovery. In addition,

B. AVA T EDENFIELD, JUD
UNITED STATES DISTRIC7'COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA