Durkee v. Jett et al

Filing 26

ORDER granting (25) Motion to Consolidate Cases for Discovery. All further pleadings to be electronically filed to: 1:08cv429 only. Member Case: 1:09cv231 to be administratively closed; denying (25) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:08-cv-00429-MR-DLH; granting (28) Motion to Consolidate Cases for Discovery. All further pleadings to be electronically filed to: 1:08cv429 only. Member Case: 1:09cv231 to be administratively closed; denying (28) Motion to Amend/Correct in cas e 1:09-cv-00030-MR-DLH; granting (10) Motion to Consolidate Cases for Discovery. All further pleadings to be electronically filed to: 1:08cv429 only. Member Case: 1:09cv231 to be administratively closed in case 1:09-cv-00227-MR-DLH; granting (15) Mot ion to Consolidate Cases for Discovery. All further pleadings to be electronically filed to: 1:08cv429 only. Member Case: 1:09cv231 to be administratively closed in case 1:09-cv-00231-MR-DLH. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on September 10, 2009. (jhg)

I N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA A S H E V IL L E DIVISION 1 :0 8 cv 4 2 9 [c o n s o lid a t in g 1:08cv429, 1:09cv30, 1:09cv227, and 1:09cv231] M A R G I E GAIL DURKEE; MICHAEL EARL D U R K E E ; JACKIE NEWTON, Guardian Ad L ite m on behalf of C. D.; BARNEY DURKEE; a n d BARBARA DURKEE; P la in t if fs , V s. C A R R O L L JETT; CORETRANS, LLC; D O M T A R PAPER COMPANY, LLC; D O M T A R INDUSTRIES, INC.; DOMTAR, I N C .; DOMTAR CORPORATION; P E O P L E A S E CORPORATION, D efen d an ts. _______________________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORDER C O N S O L ID A T IN G CASES

T H I S MATTER is before the court on plaintiffs' Motion for Consolidation for D is c o v e r y Purposes and for Case Management Plan (#25). Counsel for plaintiffs s ta te in such motion that all parties, with the exception of defendant Domtar, Inc., are in agreement as to such proposed relief. A s previously expressed, this court can see absolutely no reason why these a c tio n s should not be tried together and, for that matter, why they were not brought in one action in the first place. As plaintiffs state in the their motion, all plaintiffs w e re passengers in the same car and were allegedly injured in the same accident. T h u s , the court can see no reason not to consolidate these cases. Further, the court s ee s no reason to limit such consolidation to discovery as separate trials of each
-1-

p la in tiff's claims would result in an extraordinary waste of judicial resources and c o u ld well lead to inconsistent results. As trial approaches, any party can, of course, m o v e for separate trials. F in a lly , plaintiffs state that Domtar objects to the proposed modifications to the P r e tria l Order to which all other parties have agreed. With joinder of all claims, the c a rt is a little before the horse at this point inasmuch as issues have not fully joined. S e e L.Cv.R. 16.1(D). Upon full joinder of the issues, the parties shall conduct an IAC a n d then file a CIAC as well as a proposed Pretrial Order. If any party cannot agree to a discovery plan, the court will gladly hear the reasons if a Motion for IPC is filed. W ith the exception of any outstanding discovery requests or depositions that w e re noticed before consolidation, discovery pursuant to any previously entered P re tria l Orders in any of these cases will be suspended pending entry of a new Pretrial O rd er. ORDER I T IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that plaintiffs' Motion for Consolidation f o r Discovery Purposes and for Case Management Plan (#25) is ALLOWED in part a n d DENIED in part as follows: (1 ) 1:08cv429, 1:09cv30, 1:09cv227, and 1:09cv231 are

C O N S O L I D A T E D for all purposes, and this action shall proceed under th e above re-styled caption in the earliest filed docket number, 1 :0 8 c v 4 2 9 ; (2 ) a n y party may move at an appropriate time to sever any action for trial

-2-

u p o n a showing of good cause for such relief; (3) P r e tr ia l Orders now in place in any of the above captioned cases are S U S P E N D E D pending joinder of the issues in this matter and the timely filin g of a CIAC and proposed PTO in the consolidated case. Any party w h o cannot concur in a CIAC may file with the court its objections along w ith a Motion for an IPC; (4 ) o u ts ta n d in g discovery requests and previously noticed depositions under a n y earlier Pretrial Order shall be honored and completed; and (5) it appearing that issues will not join for another month, counsel for the re s p e c tiv e parties are encouraged to use such time productively by d is c u s s in g the possibility of early mediation of this dispute and selecting a n experienced mediator.

Signed: September 10, 2009

-3-