Daniels v. Van Hook

Filing 14

ORDER GRANTING 12 MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE, by Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. This case is now closed and consolidated into the Lead Case; Malone et al v Strong et al, No. 3:16-cv-05284-RBL-DWC. All further documents and pleadings are to be filed in the lead case only. No further filings are to be filed in this matter. (GMR)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

6
7
8

BURT DANIELS,
Plaintiff,

9

11

VAN HOOK,
Defendant.

12
13

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE

v.

10

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-05874-RBL-DWC

The District Court referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action to United States Magistrate

14 Judge David W. Christel. Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Consolidate Water
15 Claims (“Motion”). Dkt. 12. 1 Plaintiff requests the Court consolidate his claims related to the
16 potable water at the Special Commitment Center (“SCC”) in this case with Malone v. Strong,
17 Case No. 3:16-cv-5284-RBL-DWC. Id. Defendant did not file a response to the Motion. After
18 reviewing the Motion, attached declaration, and relevant record, the Motion is granted. The
19
20
1

Pursuant to Local Rule 42, a motion to consolidate should be filed in the earliest filed case, which in this

21 case would be Malone v. Strong, Case No. 3:16-cv-5284-RBL-DWC, and notice should be filed in the later filed
case. Here, the Motion was filed in the later filed case without a motion or notice being filed in the earlier case.

22 Local Rule 42 also requires parties to meet and confer and attempt to reach an agreement regarding consolidation of
23
24

the cases. There is no evidence the parties met and conferred in this case. If counsel intends to consolidate future
cases with Malone v. Strong, the Motion should be filed in Malone v. Strong with notice in the later filed case.
Additionally, the Motion should indicate if the parties met and conferred and if the parties agree to the
consolidation, a stipulation to consolidate should be filed. In the interests of justice, the Court will consider the
Motion in this case and consolidate the current case with Malone v. Strong.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE - 1

1 claims in this case related to the potable water at SCC are consolidated with Malone v Strong,
2 Case No. 3:16-cv-5284-RBL-DWC.
3

Dated this 15th day of February, 2017.

A

4
5

David W. Christel
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE - 2