2328 Fairview Condominium Association v. Continental Western Insurance Company et al

Filing 26

ORDER to Consolidate granting Unopposed 16 MOTION to Consolidate and denying Motion to Continue Trial and Case Schedule; case consolidated with C16-1873RSM by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8
9

2328 FAIRVIEW CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, a Washington non-profit
corporation,

10

Plaintiff,

11

v.

12

14

CONTINENTAL WESTERN
INSURANCE COMPANY, an Iowa
corporation; and DOE INSURANCE
COMPANIES 1-10,

15

________________________________

17

2328 FAIRVIEW CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, a Washington non-profit
corporation,

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
AND DENYING MOTION TO
CONTINUE TRIAL AND CASE
SCHEDULE

Defendants.

16

CASE NO. C16-1722RSM

13

18
19

Plaintiff,
v.

20
21

GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE
COMPANY, et al.,

22

Defendants.

23
24
ORDER - 1

CASE NO. C16-1873RSM

1

Upon review of the unopposed motion to consolidate filed in the above matters, the Court

2 GRANTS Defendants’ motion (Dkt. #16).

Accordingly, 2328 Fairview Condominium

3 Association v. Continental Western Insurance Company, et al., Case No. C16-1722RSM, and
4 2328 Fairview Condominium Association v. Great American Insurance Co., et al., Case No.
5 C16-1873RSM, shall be CONSOLIDATED. All future documents shall be filed only under
6 the consolidated cause number C16-1722RSM, and shall not be filed under other cause
7 numbers.
8

At this time, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to continue the trial date and

9 remaining pretrial deadlines. Dkt. #16 at 2-6. Defendants offer a host of reasons for their
10 request, centering primarily on alleged discovery disputes. Yet Defendants have never filed
11 specific discovery-related motions in these consolidated matters.

Further, Defendants raise

12 alleged conflicts with the current trial date, yet they previously agreed that the matters would be
13 ready for trial after December 2017, and did not raise any objections to the trial date of January
14 8, 2017, when the Court’s Scheduling Order was issued on January 6, 2017, or at any time soon
15 thereafter. In addition, the Court agrees that a lengthy trial delay could prejudice Plaintiff’s
16 members. See Dkt. #22 at ¶ 3. As a result, the Court finds that Defendants have failed to
17 demonstrate good cause for an extension of the trial date or pretrial deadlines at this time.
18

DATED this 4th day of August 2017.

19

A

20

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
ORDER - 2