Manago

Manago v. Hap Trucking Ltd.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 31, 20252:24-cv-01496California476 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 QUENTIN PAUL GARCIA, Plaintiff, No. 2:24-cv-01948-TLN-CKD v. HAP TRUCKING LTD; GURHAM ORDER SINGH GILL and DOES 1-25, inclusive, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 No. 2:24-cv-01496-TLN-CKD

MICHAELA MANAGO,

20 Plaintiff, 21 v.

HAP TRUCKING LTD; GURHAM

23 SINGH GILL and DOES 1-25, inclusive, 24 Defendants. 25 26 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Quentin Paul Garcia and Michaela Manago’s 27 (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) unopposed Motions to Consolidate two related cases. (No. 2:24-cv- 28 01947-TLN-CKD, ECF No. 20; No. 2:24-cv-01496-TLN-CKD, ECF No. 16.) The two actions arise out of a single motor vehicle accident. In both actions, Plaintiffs allege Defendants Hap Trucking Ltd. (“Hap Trucking”) and Gurham Singh Gill (“Gill”) (collectively, “Defendants”) were in some manner responsible for an accident in which, among other things, they failed to operate a tractor trailer in a reasonable manner and failed to train and supervise Gill, which caused him to operate the tractor trailer…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.