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
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ALLEN RICHARDSON,
CASE NO. CV-F-05-1422 FVS LJO
Plaintiff,
ORDER TO SEVER PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
AND ON FILING FEE
vs.
ERIC CHRISTIANSON, et al.,
Defendants.
/
The United States District Court, District of Maryland recently transferred this action to this
Court. Plaintiff Allen Richardson (“plaintiff”) proceeds pro se and filed in this action several “civil
complaints” which this Court construes as two separate legal actions. F.R.Civ.P. 21 provides that
“parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or of its own initiative
at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just,” and “any claim against a party may be severed
and proceeded with separately.” F.R.Civ.P. 21 applies when claims asserted by or against the joined
parties do not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence or do not present a common question of
law or fact. See F.R.Civ.P. 20(a); Pan Am Airways v. United States Dist. Ct., 523 F.2d 1073, 1080 (9th
Cir. 1975). Courts have broad discretion regarding severance. Davis v. Mason County, 927 F.2d 1473,
1479 (9th Cir. 1991).
Plaintiff’s claims against defendants B. Garcia and R. Soltero do not arise out of the same
transaction or occurrence and do not present a common question of law or fact as plaintiff’s claims
Case 1:05-cv-01478-OWW-DLB Document 2 Filed 11/14/2005 Page 1 of 3
Richardson v. Christianson et al
Doc. 2
Dockets.Justia.com
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
against the other defendants, Eric Christianson, Heather Robinson Daniels and B. O’Neill. As such, the
claims against defendants B. Garcia and R. Soltero should be severed from those against defendants Eric
Christianson, Heather Robinson Daniels and B. O’Neill.
On the basis of good cause, this Court:
1.
ORDERS th