Joinder Flashcards
Claim Joinder by Plaintiff
Plaintiff may join additional claim they have against an adverse party - even if the additional claim is unrelated to the original claim. However, there has to be subject matter jurisdiction over the claim.
What happens if a the plaintiff is planning the case and wants to have multiple plaintiffs or multiple defendants?
The rule is that claims by multiple plaintiffs or against multiple defendants must (1) arise from the same transaction or occurrence; (2) raise at least one common question of law or fact; and (3) there is SMJ over all claims.
Ex: Three passengers are injured when the taxi in which they are riding crashes. They can sue together as co-plaintiffs because their claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence (the car accident) and the claims raise at least one common question of law or fact (who was negligent). We would need to know if there is subject matter jurisdiction though.
A case has been filed and now the court may force some non-party (absentee) to join in the case, usually in motion by the defendant. How do you approach this problem?
We ask 3 questions
1. Is the absentee necessary/required?
2. If the absentee is necessary, can the absentee be joined?
3. If the absentee can’t be joined, can the case proceed anyway?
Question 1: How do we determine if an absentee is necessary/required?
3 different scenarios in which an absentee is necessary:
(1) without the absentee, the court cannot accord complete relief among the existing parties.Under this prong we are worried about the possibility of more lawsuits.
(2) The absentee’s interest may be harmed is she is not joined. Here we are worried about the absentee’s interest.
Ex: Josh holds 1,000 shares of stock in XYZ corp. Rich claims that he and josh bought the stock jointly and that he paid for half the stock. Rich sues XYZ corp., seeking to have josh’s stock canceled and the stock reissued in the joint names of josh and rich. Is josh necessary? Yes because if rich wins the case, josh’s stock gets canceled. Josh would be hurt and to avoid that hurt josh is a necessary absentee and is brought into the case.
(3) The absentee claims an interest that subjects a party (usually the defendant) to risk of multiple obligations. Here, we are worried about the defendant.
Joint tortfeasors are never necessary.
Question 2: Can the absentee be joined?
If an absentee is necessary, the court must determine if joinder is feasible. Joinder will be feasible if:
(1) there is personal jurisdiction over the absentee (for personal jurisdiction purposes in this limited situation, if the absentee is served within a district of the United States and not more than 100 miles from where the summons was issues, there is personal jurisdiction over the defendant); and
(2) there will be federal subject matter jurisdiction over the claim by or against the absentee. In determining whether the claim invokes diversity, the court will align the absentee as a plaintiff or defendant based on the absentee’s interests.
If both are met, the absentee is joined to the case and our analysis is over.
Question 3: What happens if the absentee cannot be joined (no pj or no subject matter jurisdiction)?
The court must then determine whether to proceed without the absentee or to dismiss the entire case. In making this determination, the court will look at the following factors: (1) is there an alternative forum available? (2) what is the actual likelihood of harm to the absentee (maybe the claim is weak and P wont win anyway so the absentee wont get harmed); (3) can the court shape relief to avoid harm to the absentee?
If a court decides to dismiss the case, the absentee is called indispensable.
Claim joinder by defendant - Counterclaims
A counterclaim is against an opposing party. The counterclaim is part of the defendant’s answer. After the defendant serves a counterclaim against the plaintiff, the plaintiff must respond under Rule 12 within 21 days of service of the counterclaim. There are 2 types of counterclaims; (1) compulsory counter claims and (2) permissive counterclaims.
Compulsory counterclaims
A compulsory counterclaim is one that arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff’s claim. Unless the counterclaimant has already filed the claim in another case, she must file the compulsory counterclaim in the pending case or the claim is waived. If yo don’t use it, you lose it. This is the ONLY compulsory claim in federal court.
If a defendant gets a case dismissed and is never required to answer due to the grant of a 12(b) motion to dismiss, that defendant is not barred from suing the plaintiff in a subsequent case. The above rule only applies if the case proceeds to a point where the defendant had to file an answer in which case they would have had to file their compulsory counterclaims.
As always there must be subject matter jurisdiction over the counterclaim including subject matter jurisdiction.
Permissive counterclaims
A permissive counterclaim is one that does not arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff’s claim. Permissive means that the party is not required to file it in this case and can sue on the claim in a separate case or they can sue on it in this case.
As always there must be subject matter jurisdiction over the counterclaim including supplemental jurisdiction.
Crossclaims
A crossclaim is a claim against a co-party. It must arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the underlying action. iT IS NOT COMPULSORY meaning it can be asserted in another case. There must of course be subject matter jurisdiction over the claim as well.
Impleader
An imp leader claim (also called a third-party claim) is one where a defending party (usually the defendant) is bringing in a new party .As to the impleader claim, the party bringing the claim is called a third party plaintiff and the new party is called a third party defendant.
An interpleader claim is used to shift to the third party defendant the liability that the defendant will owe to the plaintiff. So, if the defendant is found liable to the plaintiff, he will try to get the third party defendant to pay all or part of his own liability. We look for indemnity claims (shift liability completely so the third party defendant must cover the full claim) and contribution claims shift the fault pro-rata so the third party defendant must cover a pro-rate portion of the claim.
An impleader claim is permissive meaning that the defendant need not bring it in the current case.
What is the process for imp pleading a third party defendant into a case?
To implied a third party, the defendant must (1) file a third-party complaint naming the third party defendant and (2) have that complaint formally served on the third party defendant.
There is a right to implied within 14 days of serving the answer. After that, court permission is needed.
What can the third party defendant and plaintiff do once a third part defendant is imploded into a case?
After the third party defendant is joined into the case, the plaintiff may assert claims against the third party defendant, and the third party defendant may assert claims against the plaintiff, that arise out of the same transaction or occurrence as the underlying case.
HOWEEVR, keep in mind subject matter jurisdiction is required for each and every claim. The limitation use on supplemental jurisdiction applies only to claims by the plaintiff, if at all, and the third party defendant is not a plaintiff. Personal jurisdiction os also required, the loophole that exists for an absent party also exists for a third party defendant in that there will be personal jurisdiction over an imploded party if he is served in any United States district and not more than 100 miles from the federal court that issued the summons reagardess of his contacts with the forum.
Intervention
A nonparty absentee uses intervention to bring herself into the case. She chooses to come in either as a plaintiff to assert a claim or as a defendant to defend a claim. The court may realign the intervening party if it thinks that the absentee came in on the wrong side. Intervention can be of right or permissive.
Intervention of right: If the absentees interest may be harmed if she is not joined, and that interest is not adequately represented by the current parties, intervention is of right.
Permissive intervention: If the absentee’s claim or defense and the pending case have at least one common question of law or fact, intervention would be permissive and discretionary with court. Permissive intervention is usually allowed unless it would cause delay or prejudice to someone.
As always, you must assess whether the claim by/against the intervenor invokes diversity of federal question subject matter jurisdiction. if neither is in existence then look to see if supplemental jurisdiction exists. A CLAIM BY AN INTERVENOR PLAINTIFF IN A DIVERSITY CASE IS A CLIAM BY A PLAINTIFF, so the limitation for plaintiffs in supplemental jurisdiction would apply.
Interpleader
An interpleader suit permits a person/stakeholder to require two or more adverse claimaints to the stake to litigate amongst themselves to determine which, if any, has the valid claim to it. There are 2 interpleader procedures in the federal courts: (1) rule 22 interpleader and (2) section 1355 interpleader (statutory interpleader).
(1) Rule 22 interpleader: requires (1) complete diversity between the stakeholder and all adverse claimants and in excess of 75k in issue, or (2) federal question claim. Normal service and venue rules apply.
(2) Statutory interpleader requires only diversity between any 2 contending claimants and $500 be in issue. Service may be nationwide and venue is proper where any claimant resides.
