Select Page

Civil Procedure I
University of Connecticut School of Law
Tait, Colin C.

Ch 13 – Basic Rules of Joinder

Introduction
Ø “the P is master of his claim” – that is it is up to the P to decide who the parties to the suit will be and which claims will be asserted in the action
Ø Rule 20a – governs initial joinder of parties
¯ authorizes P’s to sue together is they assert claims arrising out of the same transaction or occurrence and their claims against D or Ds will involve common question of law or fact
¯ allows the P to sue multipls Ds in a single action if the above criteria are met
¯ does not require parties to be joined whenever the criteria in the rule r met, joinder decision is left the the P initially
¯ if P chooses to sue some but not all Ds in one action they may sue others in a separate action r never sue them at all
Counterclaims & Cross-Claims
Ø Rules 18 & 13 authorize parties, once they are properly joined in a law suit to assert additional claims against opposing parties
Ø Counterclaims – Rule 13 – authorizes a D’ing party in a suit to assert claims back against a party who has claimed against them
¯ 13a – compulsory counterclaims
► if the D’ing party’s counterclaim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the claim against him, essentially means that the D must assert this claim in the original action or lose it
► it forces parties who r already adversaries to litigate all claims arising from the same set of facts in a single action
¯ 13b – permissive counterclaims
► are completely unrelated to the original claim
► 42b – cannot be justified on efficiency grounds since they will involve diff events from the main claim and the ct will almost always order a separate trial for them
► allows a D, once brought before the ct to settle all his claims against his opponent w/out having to file separate lawsuit
Ø Cross-Claims – Rule 13g – provides for assertion of cross-claims arising out of the same transaction or occurance as the main claim
¯ a claim asserted by one party against a co-party, that is someone on the same side of the claiment
¯ called a cross-claim rather than a counterclaim b/c it is asserted by one D against a co-D
Ø D does not have to join Co-D in this suit, joing Co-D just makes everything more efficient
Ø any D’ing party not just the original D can cross-claim

Joinder of Claims under Rule 18a
Ø Rule 18a – provides that a party seeking relief from an opposing party may join with his original claim any additional claims he has against that opposing party
Ø allows P or D to assert his claim for say assault in the same action with say a neglkigence claim
Ø as many claims as needed
Ø unlike 20a there is no common transaction or occurrence requirement
Ø like rule 13, 18a authorizes a “pleader” to assert as many claims as

3rd party D must respond under Rule 12 & has the same options to answer or move to dismiss
¯ 3rd party D may also file counterclaims against the 3rd party P & may implead further parties under rule 14
¯ Automatic Impleader Provision – D may implead a 3rd party w/in 10 days of answering the complaint, w/out obtaining leave of ct
► this suggests that the ct must hear the 3rd party claim if it is filed w/in the 10 day period
¯ Denial of Rule 14
► undue delay in seeking it
► complication of the issues in the main action
► potential prejudice to the P from impleading a sympathetic 3rd party
¯ impleading a 3rd party D does not affect the ct’s jurisdiction over the original claim
► BUT there must still be a basis for subject matter jurisdiction over the impleader claim
¯ 3rd party is disregarded in determining whether venue is proper
► if the 3rd party d’s residence were considered in applying the venue statute, Ds would be able to defeat federal jurisdiction in many cases in which the P had properly invoked it simply by impleading Ds from the right (actually wrong) states