HATHORN v. SUMTER COUNTY RETIREMENT VILLAGE INC

United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia

HATHORN v. SUMTER COUNTY RETIREMENT VILLAGE INC

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ALBANY DIVISION

SONYA HATHORN, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : CASE NO.: 1:24-CV-195 (LAG) : SUMTER COUNTY RETIREMENT VILLAGE. INC., : : Defendant. : : ORDER Before the Court is the Parties’ Consent Motion to Consolidate (Doc. 9). Therein, the Parties move to consolidate this case with Johnson et al. v. Sumter County Retirement Village, Inc., Civil Action File No: 1:25-cv-00088-LAG (M.D. Ga.) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42. (Id. at 1). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) allows a district court to consolidate “actions involv[ing] a common question of law or fact[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). This rule codifies a district court’s “inherent managerial power” to control and marshal the cases on its docket to promote economy of time and effort. Hendrix v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc.,

776 F.2d 1492, 1495

(11th Cir. 1985). The Eleventh Circuit has urged district courts “to make good use of Rule 42(a) in order to expedite the trial and eliminate unnecessary repetition and confusion.” Young v. City of Augusta, Ga.,

59 F.3d 1160, 1169

(11th Cir. 1995) (citation, quotations, and alterations omitted). Before consolidation, a court should weigh the risk of prejudice and confusion against the possibility of inconsistent adjudications and burden on the parties, witnesses, and the court. Hendrix,

776 F.2d at 1495

. Here, the above-referenced cases are prime candidates for consolidation. First, the actions involve the same operative fact pattern, issues, and attorneys. Second, consolidation will reduce delay and inefficiency. For instance, consolidation will result in one trial, preventing duplicative evidence and avoidable expense for witnesses and the Parties. Lastly, the Parties have not identified any possible risk of prejudice or confusion; rather they move jointly for consolidation. Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the Consent Motion to Consolidate. (Doc. 9). Furthermore, the Court DIRECTS the clerk of the court to consolidate the above- referenced actions. SO ORDERED, this 7th day of August, 2025.

/s/ Leslie A. Gardner LESLIE A. GARDNER, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Reference

Status
Unknown