Joinder

Question 1

20(a)

Answer 1

Allow P to join multiple P and D
Who MAY be joined in a case
- Claims arise same transaction or occurrence
- Claims raise 1 common question

CO-Defendants
Same as ^

Question 2

Necessary and indispensable Parties

Answer 2

Rule 19
Non-Party (absentee)

Could be forced into case by court
(1) is absentee necessary? Meet 19(a)(1) tests
(a) W/O absentee the court cannot accord complete relief among the parties (efficiency) (b) Absentees interest MAY be harmed if not joined (focus on absentee interest)
(c) Absentee’s interest may subject the defendant to multiple or inconsistent obligations

(2) Is joinder of absentee FEASIBLE?
(1) Personal Jurisdiction
(2) Bringing in Absentee going to mess up diversity jurisdiction

(3) IF JOINDER of absentee NOT feasible
- proceed w/o absentee
- dismiss entire case
(if need to dismiss absentee is labeled indispensable)
Factor Test up to Court

Question 3

18(A)

Answer 3

Any claims P has MAY bring

Question 4

Claim Joinder by Defendant

Answer 4

Counter Claim and Cross Claim

Counterclaim- Filed W/ Defendants Answer
- Compulsory
That arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiffs claim (most assert it or waive it)
ONLY one that can be waived

-Permissive
Does not arise out of same transaction or occurrence, MAY assert it or sue on it separately

Question 5

Cross Claim

Answer 5

Against a COPARTY
- MUST arise out of same transaction or occurrence as the underlying case
- Do not need to bring it
“may” bring it

Question 6

Impleader

Answer 6

Rule 14

Joining someone new
(1) Where a defending party joins a new party (3rd party defendant)
(2) 3rd party may be liable to the defendant for the plaintiffs claim against defendant
(a) Indemnity
(b) contribution
- Joint tortfeasors

Question 7

Once in the suit by impleader can P bring a suit against 3rd party?

Answer 7

P can assert a claim against the 3rd party

3rd party can assert claim against P as well (same transaction or occurrence)

Question 8

Intervention

Answer 8

24

Joining someone new

Absentee wants to be in case and brings self into case

timely/ and choose side
(1) Intervention of Right 24(a)(2)
- your interest may be harmed if you are not joined

(2) Permissive Intervention
- Claim or defense has one common question
- Up to court to allow you in

Question 9

imagine a lawsuit filed by P against two defendants, D1 and D2. Which of the following describes a third-party claim?
A claim by D1 against X for all or part of D1’s liability to P

Answer 9

A third-party claim (also called an impleader) allows a defendant to assert a claim (and thereby become a third-party plaintiff) against a nonparty who is or may be liable to the third-party plaintiff for all of that party’s liable to the original plaintiff. See Federal Rule 14.

Question 10

Rule 42

Answer 10

(a) Consolidation. If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may:

(1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions;

(2) consolidate the actions; or

(3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay.

(b) Separate Trials. For convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to expedite and economize, the court may order a separate trial of one or more separate issues, claims, crossclaims, counterclaims, or third-party claims. When ordering a separate trial, the court must preserve any federal right to a jury trial.

Question 11

20(a)(1)

Answer 11

The claims by all of the plaintiffs must arise out of the same transaction or occurrence and there must be a question of law or fact common to all plaintiffs

Question 12

New party, X, asserts a claim against D that raises a question of law or fact that is common to P’s claim against D

What would this be

Answer 12

Federal Rule 24(b)(1)(B). The hypothetical contemplates permissive intervention. An earlier provision of this Federal Rule addresses intervention as a matter of right. See Federal Rule 24(a).