Order denying the Motion to Consolidate Adversary Proceedings under Rule 42(a). The Plaintiff filed five adversary proceedings, naming various defendants. Two of the Defendants, one of which was named in all five of the complaints, sought to consolidate the proceedings. The Court concluded that even though the proceedings dealt with similar questions, they each concerned different parcels of real property and different defendants. The Court denied the motion because the consolidation of the cases would not promote judicial efficiency.