Hart v. Perkins

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 CODY HART et al., CASE NO. 2:23-cv-309 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 12 v. 13 RONALD WESEN et al., 14 Defendants.

15 CODY HART et al., CASE NO. 2:23-cv-312 MJP 16 Plaintiffs, 17 v. 18 SANDRA PERKINS et al., Defendants.

CASE NO. 2:23-cv-311 MJP CODY HART et al., Plaintiffs v. RICHARD WEYRICH et al., Defendants.

2 This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Notice of Related Cases., which the Court interprets as a Motion to Consolidate (Dkt. No. 11.) Having reviewed the Motion, Plaintiffs’ complaints filed in Hart et al. v. Perkins et al., 2:23-cv-312; Hart et al. v. Weyrich et al., 2:23-cv-311, and Plaintiffs Opposition to the Motion, the Court GRANTS the Motion and ORDERS the above-captioned cases be consolidated for all purposes.

7 The Plaintiffs in the three different actions filed against various Skagit County employees. Under Rule 42(a), the Court may consolidate cases that involve common questions of law or fact. Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). The Court enjoys broad discretion in making this determination. See Inv'rs Research Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for Cent. Dist. of Cal., 877 F.2d 777, 777 (9th Cir. 1989). The Court usually considers several factors in analyzing consolidation, including judicial economy, whether consolidation would expedite resolution of the case, whether separate cases may yield inconsistent results, and the potential prejudice to a party opposing. See 9 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2383 (3rd ed. 2020).

16 Consolidation is appropriate here given the three actions present common questions of law and fact and there are substantial efficiencies to be gained. All three actions involve claims that Skagit County employees vacated their office because their bond was not timely deposited with the Skagit County Clerk. And Defendants are all represented by Skagit County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. Consolidation for all purposes will further conserve party and judicial resources. As such the Court GRANTS the Motion and consolidates all three actions.

22 All filings in this consolidated action shall be filed on the docket of the initial case before this Court (C23-309) with the following caption: CODY HART et al., CASE NO. C23-309 MJP Plaintiffs, v. RONALD WESEN, et al., Defendants.

The Clerk is directed to file this Order in all three cases and then administratively close the following related cases: (1) C23-312 MJP; (2) C23-311 MJP.

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.

Dated April 10, 2023 11 A Marsha J. Pechman 13 United States Senior District Judge