Order to Show Cause Re: Restraining Order
The opposition requests that any consolidation either exclude 24CV-06543 or limit consolidation for discovery purposes only.
The court denies both requests. To allow 24CV-06543 to proceed separately would not only create substantial inefficiencies for the court and parties, but it could also result in inconsistent rulings. Further, the court is not aware of any authority for consolidation only for purposes of discovery. While the parties are free to stipulate that all discovery in any of the related cases be deemed to have been propounded and answered in all of the cases, case law only recognizes two types of consolidation: that for purposes of trial only and that for all purposes. (See Hamilton v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1127, 1147 [Under the statute and the case law, there are thus two types of consolidation: a consolidation for purposes of trial only . . .; and a complete consolidation or consolidation for all purposes . . .].)
Accordingly, the motion to consolidate for all purposes is granted.
24CV-04539 is to be designated as the master file. All subsequent documents must be filed only in 24CV-04539. (Rule of Ct. 3.350)
Case Management Conference
Appearance required.
26CV-01625 Gayle Cloutier et al vs Richard Cloutier
Order to Show Cause Re: Restraining Order
Appearance required.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”