Culbertson v. Deloitte Consulting LLP
- Lewis Liman
- 1:20-cv-03962
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Culbertson v. Deloitte Consulting LLP, Judge Liman proposed consolidating four related cases and paused Deloitte’s response deadline.
The four related cases involving Paul Culbertson, Melissa Alexander, Janet M. Burns, Kathy Neal, and Deloitte Consulting LLP; any party may object to consolidation, and Deloitte’s deadline to answer or move to dismiss is postponed.
What happened
Culbertson v. Deloitte Consulting LLP involves four related cases brought by Paul Culbertson, Melissa Alexander, Janet M. Burns, and Kathy Neal against Deloitte Consulting LLP. Each plaintiff sued individually and on behalf of similarly situated people.
The court said it intended to combine the cases into one action for convenience, speed, and efficiency. It ordered any party opposing consolidation to file a letter of no more than two pages by June 23, 2020, at 5:00 p.m., and postponed Deloitte’s deadline to answer or seek dismissal until further order.
Judge Lewis J. Liman issued the June 16, 2020 order. The order does not state that the cases had already been consolidated.
The detailed version
- Culbertson v. Deloitte Consulting LLP · No. 1:20-cv-03962
- Lewis Liman
- June 16, 2020
Background
The court stated that four cases had been assigned to it because they were related. The cases were brought by Paul Culbertson, Melissa Alexander, Janet M. Burns, and Kathy Neal, each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, against Deloitte Consulting LLP.
Court’s Action
For convenience, expedition, and judicial economy, the court stated that it intended to consolidate the cases into a single action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a)(2). Consolidation is the procedural combining of related cases for coordinated handling. The court ordered that any party objecting to consolidation file a letter on the electronic docket of no more than two pages by June 23, 2020, at 5:00 p.m.
The court also adjourned, or postponed, Deloitte’s deadline to answer or move to dismiss any complaint. That deadline remains postponed pending a further order from the court. The order does not state that consolidation had already taken effect.
Disposition
Judge Lewis J. Liman issued an order inviting objections to the planned consolidation and postponing Deloitte’s response deadline. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.