Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02648/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02648-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:9607 Real Property Tort to Land

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SPPI-SOMERSVILLE, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

 TRC COMPANIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 04-2648 SI

(Consolidated with No. C 07-5824 SI)

(Related to No. C 04-2225 SI)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

CONSOLIDATION AND BIFURCATION

Plaintiffs in three cases have filed motions to consolidate all three actions and bifurcate issues

for trial. The motion is scheduled for a hearing on June 6, 2008. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b),

the Court determines that the matter is appropriate for resolution without oral argument and VACATES

the hearing. The case management conference scheduled for 2:30 p.m. on June 6 remains on calendar.

DISCUSSION

This Court previously consolidated SPPI-Somersville et al. v. TRC Companies et al., C 04-2468

SI and SPPI-Somersville et al. v. Chevron USA, C 07-5824 SI. Now, plaintiffs in these two cases, and

plaintiffs in West Coast Home Builders Inc. v. Aventis Cropscience USA, Inc., C 04-2225 SI, move to

consolidate all three actions, and to bifurcate for trial claims based on subsurface groundwater

contamination from claims for contamination of shallow-soil and a creek by municipal and industrial

waste. Defendants in all three actions oppose the motion.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42, the Court has discretion to consolidate actions if they

involve common questions of law or fact, and if consolidation is in the interest of judicial economy and

convenience. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 42; Single Chip Systems Corp. v. Intermec IP Corp., 495 F. Supp. 2d

Case 3:04-cv-02648-SI Document 178 Filed 06/04/08 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

1052, 1057 (S.D. Cal. 2007). Courts must also consider whether consolidation would prejudice any

parties. See Cantrell v. GAF Corp., 999 F.2d 1007, 1011 (6th Cir. 1993).

The Court finds that consolidation of the West Coast Home Builders case with the two SPPISomersville cases is not appropriate. Although the cases involve some common legal and factual issues,

the differences are more numerous. The West Coast case involves a different plaintiff and a different

parcel of land than are involved in the consolidated SPPI-Somersville cases, and plaintiffs seek different

remedies. The West Coast action only involves alleged groundwater contamination, while the SPPISomersville cases involve alleged solid waste contamination and groundwater contamination (No. C 04-

2648) or just solid waste contamination (No. C 07-5824). The West Coast Home Builders case also

involves some different defendants: neither the City of Antioch, the City of Pittsburg, Chevron, nor the

Garaventas are parties in the West Coast action. Indeed, the Garaventas were originally named in the

West Coast action and reached a settlement in 2004.

The Court further finds that consolidation poses the risk of prejudicing defendants because the

trier of fact would have to compartmentalize the damage caused by different sources to different parcels

owned by different plaintiffs. This is of particular concern to the Garaventas, who are no longer

defendants in the West Coast case but who are defendants in the SPPI-Somersville action. 

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons the Court DENIES plaintiffs’ motion for consolidation

and bifurcation. (Docket No. 171 in 04-2648 SI; Docket No. 117 in 04-2225 SI).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 4, 2008 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-02648-SI Document 178 Filed 06/04/08 Page 2 of 2