Catala-Velez v. Metro Santurce Inc, d/b/a Hospital Pava Santurce et al

Filing 59

ORDER granting 58 Motion to Consolidate Cases. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Marcos E. Lopez on 5/10/2013. (GDR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
FRANK G. CÁTALA-VÉLEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL NO. 12-1923 (MEL)

METRO SANTURCE, INC.,
d/b/a HOSPITAL PAVÍA SANTURCE, et al.,
Defendants.

IVELISSE VÉLEZ, individually and in
representation of her minor daughter M.C.V.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

CIVIL NO. 13-1198 (MEL)

ILEANA RIVERA-ARTES,
Defendant.

ORDER
Having taken into account the order entered on May 10, 2013, in Civil No. 13-1198 (D.E.
10), plaintiffs’ request to consolidate both cases of caption is hereby GRANTED. (D.E. 58 in
Civ. No. 12-1923). At the initial scheduling conference in Civil No. 12-1923, an objection was
raised that consolidation would destroy complete diversity. The court, however, does not find
this argument to be persuasive. See In re iBasis, Inc. Derivative Litig., 551 F. Supp. 2d 122, 125
(D. Mass. 2008) (“Courts have recognized that analysis of diversity jurisdiction remains separate
for cases even after they have been consolidated.”); see also Cella v. Togum Constructeur
Ensembleier en Industrie Alimentaire, 173 F.3d 909, 913 (3d Cir. 1999) (holding that complete

diversity existed “even after consolidation”); Chaara v. Intel Corp., 410 F. Supp. 2d 1080, 1094
(D.N.M. 2005) (noting that “[a]lmost all cases concerning consolidation have determined that
separately filed cases retain their separate characters despite consolidation” and that the Fifth and
Tenth Circuits in particular had “indicated … that consolidated cases should be treated separately
for the purpose of determining jurisdiction”), aff’d, 245 F. App’x 784 (10th Cir. 2007).
Concerns were also raised at the initial scheduling conference regarding potential
confusion to jurors by holding a single trial. This concern, however, can adequately be taken
care of with proper preliminary and final jury instructions and a clear verdict form. Regarding
any claims of potential prejudice in having both cases seen jointly at trial, such arguments need
to be developed with more specificity.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 10th day of May, 2013.
s/Marcos E. López
U.S. Magistrate Judge

2