
    Richard G. TIENSCH and Rita K. Tiensch, Plaintiff, v. The UNITED STATES, Defendant.
    No. 94-748 T.
    United States Court of Federal Claims.
    June 6, 1995.
   ORDER

SMITH, Chief Judge.

Based upon a status conference held on June 1, 1995, in both my capacity as Chief Judge of the Court and as presiding judge over the above-captioned case, I have determined that the cases listed in the appendix to this order are related for purposes of the fair and efficient administration of justice. RCFC 77(f). As these cases involve common issues, and are all being filed by and defended by the same group of attorneys of record, the system set out in the following paragraphs will allow for the most efficient management of this court’s docket, as well as saving the plaintiffs and the United States significant resources of time and money.

1. These tax cases can be functionally divided into three classes or groups, for convenience designated by the parties and Judges Weise and Weinstein as A, B, and C eases. The following procedures will apply to each group or class of case.

2. Group A Cases: Briefing will go forward as scheduled in the lead case in Group A (Slovacek v. United States, Case No. 94-457 T) before Judge Weinstein.

3. Group B Cases: Briefing will go forward as scheduled in the lead case in Group B (Olson v. United States, Case No. 94-474 T) before Judge Weise.

4. Judges in all other cases in both Groups A and B, including the above-numbered case, Tiensch v. United States, Case No. 94-748 T, are asked to suspend those cases pending the decisions in the lead eases noted above.

5. Group C Cases, largely involving settlement issues, will proceed on a normal case track.

6. All future filings of new cases by the above counsel, that are related to either Slovacek-Group A or Olson-Group B, will so indicaté. Judges who receive any such cases are also requested to suspend them pending the outcome of the respective lead case.

7. Following the resolution of either of the lead cases, or in any extraordinary circumstances, counsel are requested to seek a status conference in Tiensch if needed to further the efficient administration of justice in all these cases at the Court.

APPENDIX

CASE NAME CASE NO. JUDGE

Group A

Slovacek 94-457 T Weinstein

McLeod 94-409 T Andewelt

Affleck 94-437 T Weise

Raines 94-771 T Horn

CASE NAME CASE NO. JUDGE

Group B

Olson 94-474 T Wiese

Nemits 94-473 T Weinstein

Holden 94-501 T Weinstein

O’Hara 94-502 T Horn

Schlattman 94-503 T Bruggink

Chase 94-510 T Futey

Frank 94-513 T Yock

Gresso 94-527 T Miller

Salchli 944538 T Andewelt

Braswell 94-649 T Tidwell

Tiensch 94-748 T Smith

Hoover 94-750 T Bruggink

Reed 94-978 T Yock

Steidinger 94-985 T Futey

Sagebiel 94-1001 T Merow

McKay 94-1002 T Horn

Desai 94- 1003 T Miller

Housley 95- 76 T Weinstein

Cahoon 95-97 T Hodges

Fisher 95-111 T Andewelt

Grasty (Wanda) 95-221 T Miller

Grasty (William) 95-223 T Yock

Schmidt 95-237 T Yock

Lutten 95-269 T Hodges

Gaus 95-296 T Hodges

Matthew 95-322 T Robinson

Group C

Race 94-313 T Margolis

Goodman 94-539 T Merow

Cwelick 195-98 T Wiese  