Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cagle v. Ryan

United States District Court, D. Arizona

June 5, 2018

Shaine Carl Cagle, Plaintiff,
v.
Charles L Ryan, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          JAMES A. TEILBORG SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Shaine Carl Cagle’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to transfer the present case to Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan in Parsons v. Ryan, CV-12-00601-DKD. (Doc. 92). Defendants have responded, (Doc. 98), and Plaintiff has elected not to reply.

         I. Background

         In the present case, Plaintiff filed a complaint against a prison director and prison supervisors, workers, and medical providers alleging violations of the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”). (Doc. 21). In Parsons, the plaintiffs filed a class action suit against prison and health directors alleging Eighth Amendment violations. Complaint, Parsons v. Ryan, No. CV-12-00601-DKD (D. Ariz. Oct. 9, 2014) (“Complaint”). Plaintiff requests to consolidate his case with Parsons.

         II. Governing Law

         Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) allows a court to consolidate cases “[i]f the actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). District courts, however, “enjoy substantial discretion in deciding whether and to what extent to consolidate cases.” Hall v. Hall, 138 S.Ct. 1118, 1131 (2018). A court “must balance the interest of judicial convenience against the potential for delay, confusion and prejudice that may result from such consolidation.” Sapiro v. Sunstone Hotel Inv'rs, L.L.C., No. CV-03-1555-PHX-SRB, 2006 WL 898155, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 4, 2006).

         Local Rule of Civil Procedure (“Local Rule”) 42.1(a) allows consolidation if the cases:

(1) arise from substantially the same transaction or event; (2) involve substantially the same parties or property; (3) involve the same patent, trademark, or copyright; (4) call for determination of substantially the same questions of law; or (5) . . . [remaining unconsolidated] would entail substantial duplication of labor if heard by different Judges.

LRCiv 42.1(a). The Court considers these factors, but “has broad discretion in deciding a motion to transfer under Local Rule 42.1(a).” Addington v. US Airline Pilots Ass’n, No. CV-08-01633-PHX-NVW, 2010 WL 4117216, at *1 (D. Ariz. Oct. 19, 2010). When considering a motion under Local Rule 42.1(a), “[a] principal factor is whether party economy or judicial economy is substantially served by transfer to another judge.” City of Phoenix v. First State Ins. Co., No. CV-15-00511-PHX-NVW, 2016 WL 4591906, at *20 (D. Ariz. Sept. 2, 2016), aff’d, No. 16-16767, 2018 WL 1616011 (9th Cir. Apr. 4, 2018).

         III. Application of Local Rule 42.1(a) to Present Motion

         Plaintiff appears to argue that consolidation with Parsons is proper under Local Rule 42.1(a). (Doc. 92).

         A. Arising From Substantially the Same Transaction or Event

         The cases do not arise from substantially the same transaction or event. While the plaintiffs in both cases allege prison mismanagement, the cases stem from entirely different facts and events. Compare (Doc. 21 at 7–55), with Complaint at 1–3, 15–56. The plaintiffs in Parsons allege systemic failures in the prison healthcare system, Complaint at 1–3, 15–56, while Plaintiff in the present case alleges mismanagement by specific prison officials and medical providers stemming from specific acts and incidents relating to Plaintiff’s unique medical situation, (Doc. 21 at 7–55).

         B. Involving ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.