A motion to consolidate asks a federal court to coordinate related actions under Rule 42(a). The rule applies when actions before the court share a common question of law or fact. It permits joint hearings or trial, consolidation, or other orders avoiding unnecessary cost or delay. Consolidation is discretionary, not automatic. [1]
Explain the overlap concretely
Identify the cases, parties, judges, claims, and procedural stages. Show the shared questions and evidence. A common company or broad subject alone may not demonstrate that combining proceedings will improve fairness or efficiency.
For example, two actions concerning the same incident and witnesses may benefit from coordinated discovery. An advanced case and a newly filed case involving only a distant background issue may create delay or confusion if fully combined.
Ask for the right level of coordination
A narrow request for joint discovery or a common hearing can be more suitable than combining every issue for trial. Address differences in parties, defenses, proof, jury questions, and prejudice. Rule 42(b)’s separate-trial authority also recognizes that efficiency must be balanced with fairness and jury rights. [1]
- State the specific relief requested.
- Compare the common and unique issues.
- Explain effects on existing deadlines and trial dates.
- Propose a clear method for filing and managing coordinated papers.
- Follow local related-case and motion procedures.
Cases in different courts need another analysis
Rule 42 concerns actions before the court. Transfer, jurisdiction, venue, or multidistrict litigation may need consideration when cases are in different districts. Section 1407 provides a separate mechanism for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in qualifying multidistrict civil litigation; it is not an ordinary motion granting one district judge control over every related case nationwide. [2]
Nor should parties assume consolidation merges all cases into one for every appellate or substantive purpose. The order’s scope and applicable law matter.
Compare statutory interpleader when the problem is competing claims to a fund, and interlocutory appeal certification when immediate review is being considered. Neither a consolidation request nor a related-case notice cures a missing jurisdictional basis or excuses service in each action.
Primary sources
Sources checked: October 31, 2026.