RDLG, LLC v. RPM Group, LLC et al

Filing 29

ORDER in case 1:10-cv-00233-MR -DLH; granting (17) Motion to Consolidate Cases for Trial. All further pleadings to be electronically filed to: 1:10cv204 only. Member Case: 1:10cv233 to be administratively closed in case 1:10-cv-00233-MR -DLH. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 12/7/2010. (pdf)

-DLH

RDLG, LLC v. RPM Group, LLC et al

D o c . 29

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA A S H E V IL L E DIVISION 1 :1 0 cv 2 0 4 [co n so lid a tin g 1:10cv204 & 1:10cv233] R D L G , LLC, ) ) P l a i n t if f , ) ) V s. ) ) R P M GROUP, LLC; RPM GROUP ) B R O K E R A G E , LLC; FRED M. ) L E O N A R D , III; JESSICA LEWIS ) L E O N A R D ; JASON BENTON; ) N IC K JAMES; and DEXTER ) H UBBA RD , ) ) D efen d a n ts. ) _______________________________ ) ) R P M GROUP, LLC, ) ) P l a i n t if f , ) ) V s. ) ) R D L G , LLC; and GLENN G. GOLDAN, ) ) D efen d a n ts. ) _______________________________ )

ORDER

T H IS MATTER is before the court on the consent Motion to Consolidate A c tio n s. For cause, counsel indicate that RPM Group, LLC v. RDLG, LLC, et al., 1 :1 0 cv 2 3 3 (W.D.N.C) and RDLG, LLC v. RPM Group, LLC, et al., 1:10cv204
-1-

Dockets.Justia.com

(W .D .N .C .) involve common issues of law and fact. Review of the pleadings reveals th at both actions involve a dispute arising from a marketing agreement or contract for th e provision of promotional and/or real property sales services for a real estate d ev elo p m e n t in North Carolina. While there are some extra-contractual claims, it ap p ears to the court that the claims in each action could have been brought in the same la w s u it. R e s o lu tio n of this motion is governed by Rule 41(a), Federal Rules of Civil P ro ced u re, which provides: (a ) Consolidation. If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the co u rt may: (1 ) jo in for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions; (2) consolidate the actions; or (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay. F ed .R .C iv .P . 42(a). The actions which the parties seek by consent to consolidate fall w ell within the bounds of Rule 42(a), and the request will be allowed. ORDER I T IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the consent Motion of Plaintiff to C o n so lid ate Actions (#17)(1:10cv233) is GRANTED, and the above actions are c o n s o lid a te d as captioned above.

-2-

Signed: December 7, 2010

-3-