CROSSCLAIM: against a co-party w/in same transaction or occurrence
COUNTERCLAIM: D against P
INTERVENTION: allows a third party to interject into the lawsuit – against traditional notion that P controls suit
Of Right: (Rule 24(a)) More stringent – IF meets all then interv. of right (if not all still can intervene if statute gives right) 1) intervener has interest relating to transaction subject of the action, 2) action may impede ability to protect their interest, AND 3) must show the interest is not adequately represented by existing parties; supp. jurisdiction is NOT available, must meet independent subject-matter jurisdiction in diversity cases.
Of Permissively: (Rule 24(b)) More flexible – when the applicant’s claim or defense has a question of law or fact in common w/main action; this is up to the discretion of the court; must meet independent subject-matter jurisdiction in diversity cases (intervener must be diverse from Ds).
3 Part Interest TEST: (Smuck v. Hobson) 1) Is there sufficient interest to intervene? 2) Is the applicant’s interest impeded in the action? 3) Is the interest not adequately represented by existing parties?
Policy: judicial economy; bad b/c it can also cause delay or prejudice to the existing parties.
INTERPLEADER: allows party vulnerable to multiple claims to money/property under their control to settle w/one proceeding by interpleading claimants.
Two types of interpleader:
Rule Interpleader (Rule 22): 1) Complete diversity (between stakeholder and all claimants unless fed. quest.) [§1332], 2) service of process in dist. Court or via long-arm statute, 3) $75K amt in controversy.
Invoked by stakeholder filing as P or counter/cross-claiming as D when one claimant has brought suit against stakeholder
Deposit by stakeholder not required
Stakeholder may deny liability
Statutory Interpleader: (28 USC § 1335 Fed. Interpleader Act) 1) Minimal diversity (one claimant from different state than another claimant no matter which side of “v”) 2) service of process is nation-wide, 3) $500 amt in controversy.
Commenced: by stakeholder by depositing monies or amount of property in the court – though stakeholder can argue that no claimants are entitled to the monies.
Steps: 1) determine if interpleader is appropriate (if not case dismissed), 2) Monies are deposited with the court while rights to the monies are determined, 3) determine substantive rights of claimants, 4) court divvies monies in an equitable manner.
~Pan Am. V. Revere: driver of a tractor was involved in an accident with multiple vehicles. The tractor driver’s insurance company deposited $100K, the policy limit, with the court to let the court allocate the funds.
~State Farm v. Tashire: Greyhound bus and truck driver were involved in an accident. The Supreme Court held that interpleader allowed the determination of the right allocation of the funds.
Policy: protects stakeholder from multiple liability claims; promotes judicial economy; protects the claimants from “race to the courthouse”; deposit in the court makes judgment distribution easy.
IMPLEADER: (Rule 14(a)) D believes 3rd party is liable to him for all of P’s claims against him may implead 3rd party D (TPD) then original D becomes TTP – MUST be indemnity subrogation, contribution or breach of warranty where TPD is only liable if TPP is – can be partial liability of TPD.
Plaintiff Impleader: when counterclaim is filed against P, P may implead TPD who is liable to P for judgment on counterclaim.
Jurisdiction: 1) Service of Process w/in 100 mile “bulge” regardless of long-arm, 2) supp. juris. Applies so citizenship & amt in cont is unimportant.
TPD Claims: TPD can make counter/cross-claims or new claims of their own or implead TPD once impleaded that are w/in same transaction or occurrence
CLASS ACTIONS: procedure where a single person or small group of co-parties represent a larger group called a “class” who share a common interest
Sub. Matter Jurisdiction: 1) Federal Question; 2) Diversity a) complete diversity means only one rep & one def must be diverse, b) Amount in Controversy (cannot aggregate to meet amount in controversy Zahn v. Paper & Sneider and Harris each must meet amt in cont in conflict w/ § 1367: one class member meets the amt in cont & other class members are supplemental parties UNTIL Abbott Lab, now b/c said governed by statute lang., can aggregate by supplem
xcluding 3) work-product of materials prepared by counsel for trial purposes or opinions of experts consulted in trial prep but who won’t be testifying
Six Methods of Discovery: 1) Mandatory Disclosure, 2) Oral or Written Depositions, 3) Interrogatories, 4) Requests to inspect documents or property, 5) Requests for Admissions, 6) Requests for physical or mental examinations.
1.Mandatory Disclosure: a) disclose names, addresses, and phone numbers of each individual likely to have discoverable info the party plans to use; b) party must furnish copy or description of all documents and tangible things in their possession they plan to use; c) info on experts to testify; d) if disclosed info needs to be changed or updated, mandatory to disclose.
2.Oral (Rule 30) or Written (Rule 31) Depositions: taken under oath, not limited to parties, most expensive method of discovery, may have to subpoena, can require documents to be brought in a subpoena duces tecum, is basically testimony on the record.
a.Depositions Before Action or Pending Appeal (Rule 27): this allows a deposition before the actual filing but only with permission of court
b.Persons before whom Depositions may be taken (Rule 28): within the US, there must be a person there to administer the oath
c.Stipulations regarding Discovery Procedures (Rule 29): parties can agree to changes in the rule so long as it does not interfere w/deadlines
d.Depositions upon Oral Exam (Rule 30): states how to take the depositions and make objection, etc.; limit of 10; must serve notice
i. (Rule 30(b)(6)): subpoena on a corporation
Objections during Oral Depositions: must be answered (unless privileged) but objection is preserved in evidence if testimony is inadmissible at trial.