Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Davis v. Solutia

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


June 2, 2006

GLYNN DAVIS, EUGENE BROMBOLICH, AND EUGENE FORNERIS, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL THOSE SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
SOLUTIA, INC. EMPLOYEES' PENSION PLAN, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Applicants' Motion to Intervene (Doc. 70). Applicants are The Monsanto Company Pension Plan and The Monsanto Company, currently defendants in a case before this Court, captioned Walker v. Monsanto, Case No. 04-cv-436-DRH. In the Walker case, Applicants have already filed a Motion to Consolidate that action with this case, as well as a case captioned Hammond v. Solutia, 06-cv-139-DRH. Therefore, Applicants wish to intervene in this case for the express purpose of filing that same Motion to Consolidate.

Plaintiffs in this case have filed a Response (Doc. 74) to Applicants' Motion to Intervene. In their Response, Plaintiffs state that they do not object to the Motion to Intervene, nor to the underlying rationale of Applicants' proposed Motion to Consolidate. However, Plaintiffs make a premature argument to clarify that they do not expressly agree with a total consolidation of the cases, but rather, advocate for a coordination of litigation. Their concerns will not be addressed in this Order, but will be considered once the parties have briefed the consolidation issue later on.

On its face, the instant matter seems appropriate for intervention pursuant to FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 24(b)(2). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Applicants' Motion to Intervene (Doc. 49) for purposes of filing their Motion to Consolidate. Applicants will now be referred to as "Plaintiff-Intervenors." Attached as exhibits to their Motion to Intervene (Doc. 70) was Plaintiff-Intervenors' proposed Motion to Consolidate and supporting memorandum. Plaintiff-Intervenors are hereby allowed to electronically file this motion and supporting memorandum, as it will not be deemed filed instanter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

David R Herndon United States District Judge

20060602

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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