Wohlsen/Crow v. Pettinato Associated Contractors & Engineers, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that if the court “decides that coordination is appropriate, it may do so in any court in which one or more of the actions is pending” and “[t]he choice of venue, like the decision to coordinate, is left to the sound discretion of the trial court.”
• affirming coordination of five secondary cases with primary case, despite differing theories of recovery, where all cases involved contract to build prison
• “[A]n order directing coordination of actions in different counties [pursuant to Rule 213.1] is an interlocutory order appealable as of right.”
• “[A]n order directing coordination of actions in different counties [pursuant to Rule 213.1] is an interlocutory order appealable as of right.”
• “[A]n order directing coordination of actions in different counties [pursuant to Rule 213.1] is an interlocutory order appealable as of right.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).