NV District Court Distinguishes Between Consolidation of Appeals vs. Assignment to a Single Judge (In re Willows - May 28, 2014)

What happens when 4 separate appeals arising from the same bankruptcy case, involving distinct issues, are assigned to 4 different district court judges? 


In the Willows Bankruptcy Case, the District Court was faced with a motion to consolidate the appeals to a single  judge.  Judge Andrew Gordon examined the interplay between Bankruptcy Rule 8002 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a).  The Court determined that in order to determine if consolidation is warranted, the appeals must have a common question of law or fact.  Unfortunately, the appeals raised different legal issues and did not involve the same factual basis.  As a result, the Court denied the motion to consolidate.


The Court then looked at our Local Rule 7-2.1 which allows a case to be assigned to a single judge if the actions involve the same parties and are based on the same or similar claim or both actions involve the same property, transaction or event.  The Court found that the same set of predicate facts underlies each appeal and that the same proceeding (i.e. the same bankruptcy case).  Accordingly, the Court determined that the one judge should hear each of the 4 separate appeals.


So who was assigned all 4 cases? Judge Gordon, wrote the decision and accepted all 4 cases.






See, In re Willows, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76872