Brewer v. Holland et al

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Senior Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 5/16/2017, DENYING Plaintiff's 16 motion for leave to add an additional plaintiff to the current action. cc: Plaintiff, pro se(RLK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
CHEROSCO L. BREWER

PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-00014-CRS

v.
OFFICER HOLLAND et al.

DEFENDANTS
Memorandum Opinion & Order

This matter is before the Court on the motion of pro se Plaintiff Cherosco L. Brewer for
leave to add an additional plaintiff to the current action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
21. Mot. Amend 1, ECF No. 16. Brewer asserts that the proposed additional plaintiff, Yvette
Allen, is currently proceeding in an action pending before the Jefferson County, Kentucky
District Court, Case No. 15-CI-12761, that “arose from the same set of facts” on which this case
is based. Id. Brewer maintains that “the efficient administration of justice should permit that she
be allowed to be added to this action as a plaintiff and avoid piecemeal litigation.” Id. at 1–2.
On May 4, 2017, this Court directed the Clerk of Court to re-issue summonses for
Defendants Holland, Steward, Casse, Adams, James, Hogan, and Beckett (collectively,
“Defendants”), who are identified as officers with the Louisville Metro Police Department. Order
5/4/2017 1–2, ECF No. 20. Defendants have not yet made an appearance in this action and thus
did not respond to Brewer’s motion to add Allen as a plaintiff to the current action.

1

A motion to add an additional plaintiff is procedurally improper. Any plaintiff who
wishes to join in the current action may move for leave to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 24. Accordingly, Brewer’s motion for leave to add an additional plaintiff is DENIED.

May 16, 2017

C al R Smpo I , ei J d e
h r s . i sn I Sno u g
e
I
r
U i dSae Ds i C ut
nt tt ir t o r
e
s tc

2