Claim and Party Joinder Flashcards
What must joinder parties also satisfy?
personal jurisdiction, venue, and subject matter jurisdiction
compulsory claims
are transactionally related; they must be joined, and if not joined are precluded by merger or bar
Plaintiffs compulsory claims
P may bring one or more causes of action against defendant but must put the entire claim before the court
Defendants compulsory counterclaims
D must raise counterclaims arising from the same transaction or occurrence. Exceptions are not ripe at time of lawsuit and requiring an additional necessary party over who the court lacks smj or pj or part of another pending action
Permissive claims
unrelated, and may be joined or sued upon separately
Unrelated claims are under which federal rule
FRCP 18
FRCP 18
Unrelated claims
- Any party asserting an original claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third party claim may join
- In two party lawsuits, p may aggregate unrelated claims against the single defendant to achieve the jurisdictional dollar amount
Permissive counterclaims
Any unrelated claim that D may have against P
Crossclaims FRCP
FRCP 13(g)
Include any claim that D may have against P
(1) relatedness requirement and (2) all crossclaims are permissive
Relatedness requirement
under crossclaims FRCP 13(g) - the crossclaim must arise out of the occurrence or transaction in P’s claim
All crossclaims are permissive
under crossclaims FRCP 13(g) - even thought the initial crossclaim must be related to P’s claim
FRCP 15
Doctrine of Relation Back for adding stale claims against existing parties
Is there relation back for permissive claims?
No
Plaintiff’s compulsory claims under doctrine of relation back
Plaintiffs may amend complaints to add stale but related claims if the original claim was filed within the period satisfactory for the amended claim, and if the requirements of FRCP 15 are met.
Defendant compulsory claims
FRCP 15 does not mention defendants counterclaims
Defendant Permissive claims
no law on relation back
General provisions for party joinder
- Real party interest–FRCP 17(a)–requires the claim to be prosecuted by the “real party interest”, but makes exceptions for certain fiduciaries such as executors, administrators, guardians, trustees etc.
- Capacity–FRCP 17(b) and ©– makes choice of law provisions for determining a party’s capacity to sue or be sued
Devices in Joinder
required parties FRCP 19
Rule 19(a)
(1) Whether existing parties can receive complete relief in that person’s absence or
(2) The absent person has an interest in the lawsuit which (a) will be impaired in that person’s absence or (b) expose existing parties to a substantial risk of increased liability or inconsistent obligations
> if any of these possibilities exist, the absent person must be joined either voluntarily or involuntarily, and as either a P or D. If the nonparty cannot be joined because of problems with PJ, SMJ, or venue, the court must consider Rule 19(b) whether the action may proceed or be dismissed.
19(b) four factor balancing test
When joinder is not feasible
1. Prejudice to the absent person or existing parties
2. The possibility of lessening or avoiding that prejudice
3. Adequacy of the judgment without the unjoinable person
4. Adequacy of plaintiff’s remedy if the action is dismissed
Permissive Party Joinder
(i) the right to relief arises out of same transaction, occurrence or series of transactions/occurrences and
(ii) a question of law or fact common to all parties
Impleader
FRCP 14 is used by D (or P defending a counterclaim) to bring indemnity or contribution claims against new parties. The third party defendant must be a nonparty. A third party must file claims.
Interpleader
a procedure in which a stakeholder may join all parties who have adverse and inconsistent claims against the stake, fund, or property. To be inconsistent, the total claim value must exceed the stake.
Rule interpleader
FRCP 22 is merely a procedural rule for party joinder and is subject to traditional rules or PJ, SMJm and venue. In diversity cases the test is (1) complete diversity between the stakeholder and the adverse claimants and a stake of exceeding $75,000
Statutory interpleader
28 USC 1335 is a special jurisdictional statute based on minimal diversity. In diversity cases the test is (1) minimal diversity between the adverse claimants with the stakeholder’s citizenship irrelevant and (2) a stake of exceeding $75,000
The interpleader statute authorizes
PJ: based on minimum contacts with the US as a whole
Venue: in any district where one or more claimants resides
Injunctions barring claimants from instituting or prosecuting other suits against the stake but not filing related suits that do not implicate the stake
Class action
FRCP 23 is means of joining the claims of a high number of plaintiffs against a high number of defendants. Parties seeking to form a class must first file the lawsuit and then file a motion for class certification.
Prerequisites of class actions
numerosity – the class must be so numerous that individual joinder is impractical
commonality –the claims of all class member share a common question of law or fact e
typicality –the named representatives must have claims typical of the class
Adequate representation–both the named representatives and the attorney must be capable of adequately representing the class
Categories of class actions
- Risk of inconsistent individual adjudications: resulting in incompatible standards or producing precedent dispositive of non-litigants
- Injunction or declaratory relief applying to the whole class
- Common questions of law or fact predominate and class relief is superior to other available methods
Party joinder devices similar to class actions
a. Shareholders Derivative Action–FRCP 23.1: allows single shareholder to bring action on behalf of other shareholders
b. Unincorporated Associations–FRCP 23.2: allows representative actions by association members only if the named representatives will fairly and adequately protect the interest of the associate and its members
Intervention
allows outsiders to join lawsuits as plaintiffs or defendants
(i) intervention by right
- By federal statute granting absolute right to intervene or
- Intervenor has (1) a related interest and (2) that interest will likely be impaired in intervenors absence
(ii)
- By federal statute granting conditional right to intervene or
- Intervenor has (1) related interest which (2) involves a common question of law or fact
Doctrine of Relation back for adding new parties after the statute of limitations has run
FRCP 15(c)(3)
- Claim against the new party relates to the facts of the original claim
- The new party had knowledge of the claim such that it will not be prejudiced by joinder at this later time
- The new party knew or should have known that but for the mistake in identity of the proper party, that it would have been a party
- Elements (2) and (3)–knowledge of the claim and knowledge of the mistake–occurred within 120 days of the issuance of the original summons that was served on the wrong party, or such extended time as the court may allow