Whitaker v. Nash County et al

Filing 30

ORDER granting 18 Motion to Consolidate Cases - The court ORDERS that civil action No. 5:ll-cv-15-FL, currently pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, is consolidated with civil action No. 5:11-cv-55 -FL, currently pending in same, for all further proceedings. A master file is hereby established for this proceeding and shall be captioned Virginia Diepheal Whitaker v. Nash County. et aI., Consolidated Civil Action No. 5:11cv-15-FL. All future filings should be filed in this matter file, civil action No. 5:11-cv-15-FL. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 12/29/2011. (Baker, C.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

WESTERN DIVISION

VIRGINIA DIEPHEAL WHITAKER,

)
)

Plaintiff,

)
)

v.

)
)

NASH COUNTY; NASH COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
SERVICES; MELVIN BATTS; and
JOSIE GREEN,

)
)

)

)

NO.5:11-CV-15-FL

)

Defendants.

VIRGINIAL DIEPHAEL WHITAKER,

)

)
)

Plaintiff,

)
)

v.

)

NO.5:11-CV-55-FL

)

NASH COUNTY; NASH COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
SERVICES; MELVIN BATTS; and
JOSIE GREEN,

)

)

)

)

)

Defendants.

)

These cases come before the court on defendants' motion to consolidate, docket entry number
eighteen in the first case captioned above, filed October 13, 2011. Plaintiff responded in opposition
on October 25,2011, and the time for reply has expired. Accordingly, the issue raised is ripe for
review.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a), the court may consolidate actions that
"involve a common question of law or fact." Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). When evaluating the issue of

consolidation, the court should weigh the risks ofprejudice and possible confusion against the risk
of inconsistent adjudications, the burden posed by multiple lawsuits, and the relative expense of
proceeding separately. Arnold v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 681 F.2d 186, 193 (4th Cir. 1982). The
decision to consolidate is committed to the trial court's discretion. Id. at 192.
Here, the complaints filed in the two cases captioned above are nearly identical. The court
discerns only one clear difference. Plaintiff alleges religious discrimination in case number 5: 11-cvlS-FL but not in number 5: ll-cv-55-FL. Otherwise, as defendants note, the claims in the latter
duplicate those in the former. In addition, the parties involved are identical. Accordingly, the court
foresees no risk of prejudice or confusion in consolidating these cases. Furthermore, to administer
them separately would only result in inefficiency.
The court therefore GRANTS defendants' motion to consolidate and ORDERS that civil
action No.5: ll-cv-15-FL, currently pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, is consolidated with civil action No. 5:11-cv-55-FL, currently pending
in same, for all further proceedings. A master file is hereby established for this proceeding and shall
be captioned Virginia Diepheal Whitaker v. Nash County. et aI., Consolidated Civil Action No.5: 11­
cv-15-FL. All future filings should be filed in this matter file, civil action No. 5:11-cv-15-FL.
SO ORDERED, this the

~q~day of December, 2011.

LOUISE W. FLANAGAN

United States District Judge

2