Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00312/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00312-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

SOVEREIGN GENERAL INSURANCE

SERVICES, INC., a California

corporation,

NO. CIV. S 05-0312 MCE DAD

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER CONSOLIDATING RELATED

CASES

SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY,

an Ohio corporation, NATIONAL

CASUALTY COMPANY, a Wisconsin

corporation, SCOTTSDALE

INDEMNITY COMPANY, an Ohio

corporation, WESTERN HERITAGE

INSURANCE COMPANY, an Arizona

corporation, R. MAX

WILLIAMSON, an individual,

JOSEPH A. LUGHES, an

individual, and DOES 1 through

100, inclusive,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

WESTERN HERITAGE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, an Arizona

corporation, NO. CIV. S 05-1389 MCE DAD

Plaintiff,

v.

SOVEREIGN GENERAL INSURANCE 

Case 2:05-cv-00312-MCE -DAD Document 23 Filed 11/03/05 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

SERVICES, INC., a California

corporation; MARTIN F. SULLIVAN,

SR. and GLORIA SULLIVAN, husband

and wife, guarantors,

Defendants.

_________________________________/

----oo0oo----

By Order dated September 1, 2005, these cases were deemed

related in accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 83-

123(a). Counsel for all parties in both actions have now jointly

moved to consolidate the two lawsuits pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 42(a), which provides in pertinent part as

follows:

“when actions involving a common question of law or fact are

pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or

trial of any or all of the matters in issue in the actions;

it may order all the actions consolidated; and it may make

such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to

avoid unnecessary costs or delay.”

 

The purpose of consolidation under Rule 42(a), where cases share

such common questions of law or fact, is to enhance trial 

court efficiency by avoiding unnecessary duplication of

proceedings and effort. See, e.g., Enterprise Bank v. Saettele,

21 F.3d 233, 235-36 (8 Cir. 1994); E.E.O.C. v. HBE Corp., 135 th

F.3d 543, 551 (8 Cir. 1998). th

The parties have represented that both related matters share

significant common issues inasmuch as both disputes arise from 

agreements and agency relationships between Sovereign General

Insurance Services, on the one hand, and insurers including

Case 2:05-cv-00312-MCE -DAD Document 23 Filed 11/03/05 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Because oral argument would not be of material assistance, 1

this matter was deemed suitable for decision without oral

argument. E.D. Local Rule 78-230(h).

3

Western Heritage and Scottsdale on the other. Sovereign

General’s lawsuit claims that the insurer defendants improperly

terminated its agency agreement, thereby depriving Sovereign

general of commission/profit sharing revenue. Conversely,

Western Heritage claims through its lawsuit that Sovereign

General failed to properly remit premium payments pursuant to the

same underlying written contracts at issue in the Sovereign

General case.

Given the parties’ agreement that consolidation is

appropriate, and following the Court’s own determination that

consolidation will promote clarity, efficiency and the avoidance

of confusion and prejudice given the above-enumerated common

nucleus of operative facts, the joint motion to consolidate is

hereby GRANTED. The Court, in its discretion, may order 1

consolidation under those circumstances. See Johnson v. Celotex

Corp., 899 F.2d 1281, 1284-85 (2d Cir. 1990).

Both actions are consequently consolidated, for all purposes

including trial. The lead case in this consolidated action shall

be Sovereign General Insurance Services v. Scottsdale Insurance

Company, et al., Case No. CIV. S 05-0312 MCE DAD. All pending

dates in both actions are hereby vacated. The parties are

directed to submit a Joint Status Report, not later than thirty

(30) days following the date of this Order. 

//

//

Case 2:05-cv-00312-MCE -DAD Document 23 Filed 11/03/05 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

The Joint Status Report shall conform with the requirements

outlined within the Court’s previous September 1, 2005 Order

Requiring Joint Status Report in Case No. CIV. S 05-1389.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 1, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-00312-MCE -DAD Document 23 Filed 11/03/05 Page 4 of 4