Smith et al v. Chapman et al

Filing 177

ORDER granting 4 Motion to Consolidate Cases for Discovery, Trial. All further pleadings to be electronically filed to: 3:14-cv-238 only. Member Case: 3:15-cv-262 to be administratively closed. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr on 07/17/2015. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(jlk)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:15-cv-00262-MOC-DSC
DOUGLAS R. SMITH, MARY LUCZAKSMITH,
Plaintiffs,
Vs.
AVERY CHAPMAN, CHAPMAN LEGAL
GROUP,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the court on Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Consolidate
(#4). Defendants seek to consolidate the above-captioned action, which was recently removed
from state court, with Smith, et al., v. Chapman, et al. (3:14-cv-238), hereinafter the “Pending
Action.” All Plaintiffs and Defendants in this case are parties to the Pending Action and the legal
claims in this action (legal malpractice and breach of contract) stem from the same facts and
circumstances as those in the Pending Action. As discussed at the July 15, 2015 hearing, the
court finds that consolidation of these two cases is appropriate pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a),
which permits consolidation where “actions before the court involve a common question of law of
fact.” Id. Here, because these two causes of action involve common issues of law and fact, as well

as common witnesses, evidence, and similar issues, the court believes that judicial economy
favors consolidation. See Johnson v. Celotex Corp., 899 F.2d 1281, 1284-85 (2d Cir. 1990).
Consolidating these cases will also avoid the risk of inconsistent judgments. See Switzenbaum v.

Orbital Scis. Corp., 187 F.R.D. 246, 248 (E.D. Va. 1999). Accordingly, the court will grant the
unopposed motion and enter the following Order.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Consolidate (#4)
is GRANTED, and the Clerk of Court is respectfully instructed to consolidate the abovecaptioned action (3:15-cv-262) with Smith, et al., v. Chapman, et al. (3:14-cv-238), with the
latter designated as the “Lead Case” for docketing purposes.

Signed: July 17, 2015