Civ Pro II
Simple Joinder
Rule 18 – Any party can bring all claims (permissive – subject to preclusion doctrine) against other parties whether related or not
– Still must meet PJ, SMJ, Venue, and other rules such as 14, 15, and 20
o Watch out for 1367, b/c may not pass SCNOOF, so no SMJ
Rule 13 –
– Counterclaims – brought by party sued by party on other side of V
o Compulsory (arises out of same occurrence) Counterclaim – must be asserted or it’s waived
o Permissive – claims not arising from same occurrence or from the same occurrence – Can’t use 1367 b/c doesn’t meet the SCNOOF Test BUT
§ Immature Claim
§ Lack of Jurisdiction over 3rd parties
§ Pending lawsuits – D already filed suit in State Ct.
o Must satisfy requirements of SMJ, PJ, but not venue (but split of authority on Permissive)
– Cross Claims – brought by parties against other parties on the same side of the V that were already parties
o Must arise out of the same transaction or occurrence
o ALWAYS PERMISSIVE
o Must satisfy PJ, SMJ, but not venue
– For Rule 18 joinder of other claims to work with Rule 13 at least one claim must arise out of the same transaction or occurrence.
– Rule 13(h) requires that for an additional party to be joined it must meet requirements of Rule 19 or 20. (It’s not me, it’s him)
Rule 20 – Joinder rule
– Must arise out of the same transaction/occurrence or series of transactions/occurrences
– Must be at least one common question of law
Rule 14 – Impleader of 3rd Party
– Indemnification claim against a 3rd party by a D (If it’s me, then he owes me)
– State Contribution Statute situations
– 3rd Party D’s can then assert claims against any parties that were already a part of the suit, and against other 3rd parties as long as they arise out of the same transaction/occurrence.
Compulsory Joinder
Rule 19 – Can be brought up by parties OR by the court Sua Sponte.
– 19(a) STEP ONE – To find out if the absentee a NECESSARY party . . . Do ANY of these 3 apply?
o Court would not be able to grant COMPLETE RELIEF to EXISTING PARTIES w/o absentee
§ EX: Co-owner of jointly owned property in suit brought by buyer of property
§ Non-EX: Temple – Joint Tortfeasors are NOT necessary parties
o Disposition might impair or impede ABSENTEE’s interests in the subject matter of the case
o Disposition might subject EXISTING PARTIES to multiple liabilities or inconsistent obligations (usually comes up in injunction situations)
§ Similar to Interpleader. D’s use Rule 19 instead of Interpleader b/c they want the case dismissed.
– STEP TWO – If “Yes” to Step One, then Is the Joinder of Absentee Feasible?
o Is there an SMJ if the absentee becomes a party?
§ EX: would it destroy diversity
o Will the court be able to exercise PJ over absentee
o If “yes,” absentee MUST BE JOINED
§ BUT may be dismissed if absentee makes a Venue objection
– 19(b) STEP THREE – If “Yes” to Step One and “No” to Step Two, then must ask if Absentee is an “INDISPENSIBLE PARTY,” requiring dismissal?
o How much will the absence of absentee prejudice him or existing parties?
§ Helzberg – Valley West was not prejudiced b/c they entered conflicting K’s
· Lord’s not prejudiced b/c they can bring separate action
o Can court lessen prejudice by some protective provision in judgment?
§ If concern in Absentee’s Interest, Ct. can invite to intervene, if he doesn’t the prejudice must not be that bad
o Will judgment w/o absentee be adequate or will absentee bring suits later?
o Will P have an adequate remedy in another forum if it’s dismissed here?
§
you from getting to pick the forum) – and is normally done by someone who would ultimately be a D (wrongdoer – Ins. Co).
§ EX: Ins Co v. C + C + C (to get court to determine how money should be paid).
o Claims must be at least partly inconsistent with one another.
– With Rule 22- normal requirements for PJ, SMJ and Venue must be satisfied
– Statutory – unique – (stake must be deposited with the court)
o PJ: Nationwide PJ and service of process
o Minimal Diversity: Any ONE claimant must be diverse from another CLAIMANT (not across the “v”) and =$500 or greater
§ In a minority of ct’s where there is a CLAIMANT P (they also believe they have a stake), they look across the “v” also.
o Venue: In any district where any one claimant resides
Class Actions – Rule 23 – the main purpose is judicial economy – allows adjudication of large #s of claims in one action.
– Class Rep brings action on behalf of members of that class and is the only “active” member of the class but all class members are bound by the outcome.
Must satisfy 2 Common Law Requirements
– The class must be capable of definition – Non-Ex: All people who believe in God
– The representative must be a member of the class
Rule 23a – must meet all four
– Numerosity – class must be large enough to render joinder impracticable
– Commonality – class involves similar questions of law or fact that resolution of which will advance the litigation – NOT a very high threshold
