Jones v. Jones ( 1990 )

BISTLINE, Justice,

specially concurring.

I concur in the majority opinion because, putting aside all of the argument and discussion in proceedings below, justice was accomplished by Judge Edwards. His performance in this difficult divorce case was outstanding.

As the majority opinion points out, consolidation is appropriate whenever it serves the purpose of judicial convenience and economy of administration. Here, such laudable purposes were not served where the two divorce actions were separately filed, one by the husband and the other by the wife. The divorce actions had identical issues, involving the same parties and their children. Accordingly, it was in order to dismiss the one filed second in time, unless in one or the other of the two actions the plaintiff was seeking to lay venue in an improper county. Dismissal of the second action, as our majority opinion points out in a footnote, would have simplified and accelerated the judicial process.