This is a motion for joint trial of actions pursuant to section 96-a of the Civil Practice Act. While it appears that one action is a suit to recover on promissory notes and the other is for the return of shares of stock, there is a fraud counterclaim in each which is identical against the principal and agent as tort-feasors. A joint trial I am convinced will avoid a duplication of work of counsel and the court. The substantial identity of factual issues makes consolidation for trial desirable (Winn v. Zone Oil Trucking Corp., N. Y. L. J., Feb. 24, 1950, p. 685, col. 5). The fact that all issues are not identical is no bar to the consolidation (Peters v. New York Bd. of Fire Underwriters, 276 App. Div. 846; Lowery v. Perner, N. Y. L. J., Oct. 19,1950, p. 868, col. 5). Weighed against certain complications which may occur in the joint trial of the actions,
Accordingly the motion is granted. For all other purposes the actions will retain their separate identity. The order in which the respective plaintiffs will proceed will be determined by the justice presiding at the trial. Separate judgments will be entered in each action, with separate bills of costs. Settle order.