Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_98-cv-04877/USCOURTS-cand-3_98-cv-04877-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLOS CASTRO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CAL TERHUNE, Director, CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

G. BONNIE GARIBAY, J. BATCHELOR, S.

C. WOLHWEND, A. SCRIBNER,

J. STOKES, M. YARBOROUGH, L. HOOD,

C. CAMPBELL, A. M. GONZALEZ,

M. AYALA, E. DERUSHA, c/o ROBERT

L. L. AYERS, Warden, and J. MARTINEZ,

Defendants. /

CARLOS CASTRO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ROBERT A. HOREL, D. MOUNT, J.,

BEESON, S. MCKINNEY, N. GRANNIS,

EVERETT W. FISCHER, D. L. SPEEN, M.

DUFF, DOES 1-100,

Defendants. /

No. C 98-04877 WHA

No. C 09-04902 WHA

ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO

STAY AND DECLINING TO

CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS

Phase II of Castro v. Terhune, Case No. 3:98-cv-04877-WHA, is scheduled for a bench

trial beginning on September 20, 2010. It will address plaintiff’s “revalidation” as a prison

gang associate in August 2009. Terhune was recently related to Castro v. Horel, Case No.

3:09-cv-04902-WHA, which will address plaintiff’s “active/inactive” review as a prison gang

associate in 2006. Plaintiff requests that Terhune and Horel be consolidated for trial. 

Case 3:98-cv-04877-WHA Document 256 Filed 02/19/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Defendants oppose consolidation and have requested that Horel be stayed until after the Phase

II trial in Terhune is complete.

The request to consolidate the two matters is DENIED. Although there are some

common questions of law and fact to both matters, they nevertheless involve different

defendants, prison staff and gang evidence. Consolidation would necessitate delay of the

pretrial schedule in Terhune and would not promote increased efficiency or convenience in the

resolution of either matter.

The request to stay Horel is also DENIED. Defendants argue that resolution of Phase II

of Terhune will likely moot Horel but they presuppose that Castro’s 2009 revalidation satisfied

his procedural due process rights, the very issue still to be decided in the Phase II trial. 

Accordingly, no stay of Horel is warranted and both Horel and Terhune shall continue to

proceed towards trial on separate tracks. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 19, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:98-cv-04877-WHA Document 256 Filed 02/19/10 Page 2 of 2