Winslow v. Gage County, Nebraska, et al

Filing 154

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting the parties joint oral Motion to Consolidate Cases 153 . The cases identified in the caption of this Memorandum and Order are consolidated for all purposes. Dean v. Gage County, Nebraska, et al, 4:09cv3144 is designat ed as the "Lead Case," and the other three cases identified in the caption are each designated as a "Member Case." The court's CM/ECF System has the capacity for "spreading" text among consolidated cases. If properl y docketed, the documents filed in the Lead Case will automatically be filed in the Member Cases. To this end, the parties are instructed to file in the Lead Case, 4:09CV3144, Dean v. Gage County, Nebraska, et al, all further documents except those d escribed in paragraph 4 and to select the option "yes" in response to the System's question of whether to spread the text. The parties may not use the spread text feature to file complaints, amended complaints, and answers; to pay fili ng fees electronically using pay.gov; to file items related to service of process; or to file notices of appeal. If a party believes that an item in addition to those described in paragraph 4 should not be filed in all of these consolidated cases, the party must move for permission to file the item in only one of the cases. The motion must be filed in all of the consolidated cases using the spread text feature. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JSF)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JAMES L. DEAN, Plaintiff, v. GAGE COUNTY, NEBRASKA, et al., Defendants. KATHLEEN A. GONZALEZ, Plaintiff, v. GAGE COUNTY, NEBRASKA, et al., Defendants. THOMAS W. WINSLOW, Plaintiff, v. GAGE COUNTY, NEBRASKA, et al., Defendants. ADA JOANN TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. GAGE COUNTY, NEBRASKA, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4:09CV3144 4:09CV3146 4:09CV3147 4:09CV3148 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER By oral motion, the parties in these four cases have jointly moved to consolidate the above-captioned cases for all stages of the cases prior to appeal, including trial. The cases involve common questions of law and fact, and the defendants are represented by the same counsel. Consolidating the cases will serve the interests of justice and judicial economy.1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the joint oral motion for consolidation for all purposes is granted, and 1) The cases identified in the caption of this Memorandum and Order are consolidated for all purposes; 2) Dean v. Gage County, Nebraska, et al, 4:09CV3144, is hereby designated as the "Lead Case," and the other three cases identified in the caption are each designated as a "Member Case." 3) The court's CM/ECF System has the capacity for "spreading" text among consolidated cases. If properly docketed, the documents filed in the Lead Case will automatically be filed in the Member Cases. To this end, the parties are instructed to file in the Lead Case, 4:09CV3144, Dean v. Gage County, Nebraska, et al, all further documents except those described in paragraph 4 and to select the option "yes" in response to the System's question of whether to spread the text. 4) The parties may not use the spread text feature to file complaints, amended complaints, and answers; to pay filing fees electronically using pay.gov; to file items related to service of process; or to file notices of appeal. 5) If a party believes that an item in addition to those described in paragraph 4 should not be filed in all of these consolidated cases, the party must move for permission to file the item in only one of the cases. The motion must be filed in all of the consolidated cases using the spread text feature. February 4, 2013. BY THE COURT: Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge 1 A progression order will be issued shortly.

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?