Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

Steven D. Leach (State Bar No. 011584) J. Steven Sparks (State Bar No. 015561) SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 3030 North Third Street, Suite 1300 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-3099 Telephone: (602) 532-5762 Fax: (602) 230-5041 [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant GLENDALE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 205

UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

JOE RAMIREZ and ANA RAMIREZ, Individually and as Parents and Legal Guardians of JOSE RAMIREZ, Plaintiffs, vs. GLENDALE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 205; JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE I-X; ABC CORPORATIONS I-X; and XYZ PARTNERSHIPS I-X, Defendants. __________________________________ JOE RAMIREZ and ANA RAMIREZ, Individually and as Parents and Legal Guardians of JOSE RAMIREZ, Plaintiffs, vs.
Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS Document 89

) CASE NO.: CIV03-0060 PHX-ROS ) ) ) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ) MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO.: CIV04-2908 PHX-VAM ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Filed 10/25/2005 Page 1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

GLENDALE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 205; TANYA SOTO and JOHN DOE SOTO; ANNIE PRESTON and JOHN DOE PRESTON; CLAY KLAVITTER and JANE DOE KLAVITTER; JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE I-X; ABC CORPORATIONS I-X; and XYZ PARTNERSHIPS I-X,

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) Defendants, by and through counsel undersigned, submit the following Reply in

9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

support of their Motion to Consolidate. In their Response, Plaintiffs cite three separate grounds for their objection to consolidation of these matters. None of those asserted bases has any merit. First, Plaintiffs contend that Ramirez I (Case No. CIV03-0060 PHX-ROS) and

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Ramirez II (Case No. CIV04-2908 PHX-VAM) have different Defendants.

It is

misleading to suggest that these two cases have different Defendants because Glendale Union High School District is a named Defendant in both. Moreover, all of the

individual Defendants in Ramirez II are teachers and administrators who were in the course and scope of their employment with Glendale Union High School District at all times relevant to Plaintiffs' claims. Thus, while it is technically true that Plaintiffs have named some individual Defendants in Ramirez II, those individual Defendants are the very same people whose conduct Plaintiffs are attempting to impute to the District in Ramirez I. Finally, it should be noted that consolidation is not limited to actions involving identical parties, but is also available to different parties and actions having common question of fact and law. Attala Hydratane Gas, Inc. v. Lowry Tims Co., 41
Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS Document 89 - Filed 10/25/2005 -2 Page 2 of 5

1 2 3

F.R.D. 164 (D.C. Miss. 1966). Second, Plaintiffs contend that the "allegations and the cases are substantially different." Defendants strongly disagree with this assertion. While Plaintiffs have, in

4 5 6 7 8

fact, raised claims for failure to supervise (in Ramirez I) and failure to report (in Ramirez II), both claims arise out of the exact same occurrence. Plaintiffs contend that Jose Ramirez, a special education student within the Defendant District, was sexually abused on one occasion by his fellow students. From that single alleged incident,

9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

Plaintiffs have asserted two claims ­ one related to the alleged failure to prevent this alleged sexual assault from occurring, and the other related to the alleged failure to report the sexual assault after-the-fact. Plaintiffs should not be entitled to pursue

11 12 13

piecemeal litigation simply because they have manufactured a new theory that stems
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

from the exact same event. All of Plaintiffs' legal and factual theories ought to be tried together in one consolidated case, regardless of how they are characterized. To allow separate trials on these highly related claims would be a monumental waste of time and judicial resources. Finally, Plaintiffs contend that Ramirez I is "much more advanced than the other case." This is, of course, true as a factual matter. However, virtually all of the discovery that relates to the alleged sexual assault ­ the core of both Ramirez I and Ramirez II ­ has already been completed and there would be absolutely no need for additional discovery on these identical issues. Defendants' position is that, if these matters are consolidated, there is very little discovery that still needs to be conducted and Defendants would propose a trial date in the relatively near future. Accordingly,
Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS Document 89 - Filed 10/25/2005 -3 Page 3 of 5

1 2 3

there will be no "substantial delay," as Plaintiffs now contend. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants respectfully request that this Court grant their Motion to Consolidate. The benefits of consolidating these two matters was

4 5 6 7 8

recognized, sua sponte, by the Court in a recent status conference in Ramirez II. At that time, Plaintiffs' counsel did not raise any legal or factual basis to proceed separately in these two highly related matters. Indeed, Plaintiffs' written objection to the Motion to Consolidate similarly fails to raise any legitimate basis to deny

9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

Defendants' Motion. purposes.

Ramirez I

and Ramirez II should be consolidated for all

11 12 13

RESPECTFULLY submitted this 25th day of October, 2005. SANDERS & PARKS, P.C.

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

By: s/J. Steven Sparks Steven D. Leach J. Steven Sparks 3030 N. Third Street, Suite 1300 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-3099 Attorneys for Defendants Glendale Union High School District No. 205 I hereby certify that on October 25, 2005, I electronically transmitted the foregoing document to the Clerk's office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following EM/ECF Registrants: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS

Document 89 - Filed 10/25/2005 -4

Page 4 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

To be hand-delivered as a courtesy hard copy on October 25, 2005, to the Honorable Virginia A. Mathis and the Honorable Roslyn O. Silver. s/ J. Steven Sparks

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS

Document 89 - Filed 10/25/2005 -5

Page 5 of 5