CONSOLIDATION RULE. An order of the court requiring, the plaintiff to join in one suit several causes of action against the same defendant which may be so joined consist ently with the rules of pleading, but upon which be has brought distinct suits. Brown v. Scott, 1 Dall. (Pa.) 147, 1 L. Ed. 74; Groff v. Musser, 3 S. & R. (Pa.) 264; 2 Archb. Pr. 180. The matter is regulated by statute in many of the states.
It may take place in two ways: first, by the usu fructuary surrendering his right to the proprietor, which in the common law is called a surrender; secondly, by the release of the proprietor of his rights to the usufructuary, which in our law is called a release.
In Ecclesiastical Law. The union of two or more benefices in one. Cowell.
In Practice. The union of two or more ac tions in the same declaration.
An order of court, issued in some cases, restraining the plaintiff from proceeding to trial in more than one of several actions brought against different defendants but in volving the same rights, and requiring the defendants also, in such actions, to abide the event of the suit which is tried. It is in reality in this latter case a mere stay of pro ceedings in all the cases but one.
It is often issued where separate suits are brought against several defendants founded upon a policy of insurance; 2 Marsh. Ins.
701; see Jackson v. Schauber, 4 Cow. (N. Y.) 78 ; Sherman v. McNitt, id. 85; or against several obligors in a bond; 3 Chit. Pr. 645; 3 C. & P. 58. See Scott v. Brown, 1 N. & McC. (S. C.) 417, note; Powell v. Gray, 1 Ala. 77; Dews v. Eastharn, 5 Yerg. (Term.) 297 ; Sykes v. Ins. Co., 7 Mo. 477 ; Den v. Fen, 9 N. J. L. 335; Groff v. Musser, 3 S. & R. (Pa.) 262; Farmers' & Manufacturers' Bank v. Tracy, 19 Wend. (N. Y.) 23.
A court may consolidate actions for trial when they involve the same property and the same questions of law and fact and the par ties are the same ; Welch v. Lynch, 30 App. D. C. 122.
Where two actions arose upon the same " transaction, one for trespass against de fendant's property, another against his per son, and might have been joined, the court ordered them tried at the same time; Holmes v. Sheridan, 1 Dill. 351, Fed. Cas. No. 6,644.
When two actions are consolidated, the original actions are discontinued and only the consolidated action remains ; Hiscox v. New Yorker Staats Zeitang, 30 Abb. N. C. (N. Y.) 131; id., 3 Misc. Rep. 110, 23 N. Y. Supp. 682.
The Federal courts are authorized to con solidate, actions of a like nature, or relative to the same question, as they may deem rea sonable ; Rev. Stat. § 921.