Samuelson v. ArcelorMittal USA LLC

Filing 45

OPINION AND ORDER granting (31 in 2:13-cv-00440-JVB-PRC) MOTION to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Certain Discovery filed by ArcelorMittal USA LLC. The Court orders that this case and Babjak be consolidated for the purpose of conducting the overlapping depositions only. The Court INSTRUCTS the parties to continue to file all future motions in both cases under separate cause numbers. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul R Cherry on 6/16/2015. (kds)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION Estate of MICHAEL SAMUELSON by STEPHANIE SAMUELSON, Personal Representative, Plaintiff, v. ARCELORMITTAL USA, LLC, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Cause No.: 2:13-CV-440-JVB-PRC 2:15-CV-40-JVB-PRC OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Consolidation for Purposes of Certain Discovery [DE 31], filed on March 24, 2015. The motion seeks to consolidate this case with Babjak v. KT-Grant, Inc., et al. (2:15-CV-40) for the purpose of conducting about ten to twelve overlapping depositions. The Court issued an order on March 26, 2015, in which it found the request well taken in the main and took it under advisement in order to determine if discovery in this case could be extended in such a way that did not cause excessive delay and also ensured that the Babjaks were not prejudiced. The Court held a telephonic hearing on the issue on June 11, 2015, and an agreeable solution was arrived at. The Court accordingly GRANTS the Motion for Consolidation for Purposes of Certain Discovery [DE 31] and ORDERS that this case and Babjak be consolidated for the purpose of conducting the overlapping depositions only. The Court INSTRUCTS the parties to continue to file all future motions in both cases under separate cause numbers. SO ORDERED this 16th day of June, 2015. s/ Paul R. Cherry MAGISTRATE JUDGE PAUL R. CHERRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?