Joinder

Question 1

What type of rules are joinder rules?

Answer 1

Joinder rules are based on statute rather than constitutional. They are also based on permission rather than power.

Question 2

Rule 18: Joinder of Claims

Answer 2

In general, a party asserting a claim, counterclaim, cross claim, or third party claim may join as many claims as it has against an opposing party.

Question 3

Rule 13

What is a compulsory counterclaim?

Answer 3

A pleader must state as a counterclaim any claim that - at the time of its service - the pleader has against an opposing party. This requires:

1) out of the same transaction/ occurrence, and
2) The counter claim must have been present at the time of service.
3) The claim is not currently part of another lawsuit.

Question 4

Rule 13:

What is a permissive counter-claim?

Answer 4

A pleading may state as a counterclaim against an opposing party any claim that is not compulsory.

Question 5

What is the major issue that needs to be handled when attempting to have a permissive counterclaim?

Answer 5

Whether or not the court will be able to have subject matter jurisdiction.

Question 6

How do courts attempt to know if a claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence to determine whether it is a permissive or compulsory counter claim?

Answer 6

Courts use the “logical relations test.”
Do these claims arise from the same aggregate of operative facts? If yes, then they come from the same transaction/occurrence. If no, then no dice.

Question 7

Rule 13(g)
What is a crossclaim against a co-party?

Answer 7

A pleading may state as a crossclaim any claim by one party against a coparty if the claim arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the original action or of a counterclaim, or if the claim relates to any property that is the subject matter of the original action.
When one defendant sues another defendant from the same lawsuit as long as it is based on the original lawsuit.

Question 8

Rule 20:

When may plaintiffs be joined in one action?

Answer 8

Rule 20(a)(1) – Plaintiffs: Persons may join in one action as plaintiffs if- 
(A) they assert any right to relief jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and 
(B) any question of law or fact common to all plaintiffs will arise in the action.

Question 9

Rule 20-

When may defendants be joined in the same action?

Answer 9

Rule 20(a)(2) – Defendants: Persons may be joined in one action as defendants if: 
(A) any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and 
(B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action.

Question 10

How does the court use the doctrine of discretion in Mosley v. General Motors Corp?

Answer 10

The court used a companywide series of discrimination to fulfill 20(a)(1)(A) and then looked at the effects of the discrimination to fulfill the requirements of 20(a)(1)(B).
The reason the court could go this wide is that these are doctrines of discretion. This means that the court has a large amount of latitude to decide when it is and is not alright.

Question 11

Is a common defendant enough to join a plaintiff to a lawsuit?

Answer 11

No. There must be a larger issue than that which ties the plaintiff into the lawsuit. The instances must be directly linked.

Question 12

Can courts independently add or remove parties?

Answer 12

Yes. A court has the discretion to add or remove parties without the motion of a party to a lawsuit.

Question 13

Rule 14:

When may a defendant bring in a third party defendant?

Answer 13

A defending party may, as third-party plaintiff (D1), serve a summons and complaint on a nonparty who is or may be liable to it for all or part of the claim against it.
Common Cases: 1) joint and several liability; 2) indemnifications; 3) impleader.

Question 14

Rule 14: What are two critical elements to remember when attempting to bring in a 3rd party defendant?

Answer 14

1) Must have a legal relationship between D1 and D2 to allow D2 to be liable to D1.
2) Must be a derivative liability:
If D1 is liable to P, then D2 is liable to D1.
Also must be the same liability. So if the P is suing D1 for a tort, D1 cannot claim that D2 is liable to him for a breach of contract.

Question 15

Rule 14: How long does a defendant have to bring in a 3rd party defendant without special permission of the court?

Answer 15

14 days. Then a motion is required.

Question 16

Rule 14: Can a third party defendant (D2) bring a claim against the plaintiff or D1?

Answer 16

Yes. 14(a)(2) Allows that D2 can also assert a claim against D1 or the P as long as 3rd claim arises out of the same transaction/occurrence as the original claim.

Question 17

Rule 14: Can the plaintiff bring a claim against a third party defendant (D2)?

Answer 17

The P can assert a claim against the third party defendant (D2) as long as they arise out of the same transaction and occurrence that is the subject matter of the original claim between P and D1. Also, D2 can assert any defense found in Rule 12.

Question 18

Rule 14: Can a third party defendant (D2) bring a claim against a non-party?

Answer 18

14(b): This allows for P to bring in a non-party for any counter claim which may be brought against it in accordance with the rules found in this section.

Question 19

What are the two types of impleader? And explain both.

Answer 19

1) Torts: the Tort doctrine is typically called contribution. Contribution is a claim that allows one tort feasor to demand that another fellow wrongdoer contribute to the damages payable to the harmed plaintiff.
2) Contracts: Contracts is called indemnity. When one party is contractually bound to be liable for the actions of another.

Question 20

What must every claim have its own basis for no matter what?

Answer 20

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Question 21

What is the general rule of supplemental jurisdiction? (1367(a))

Answer 21

The general rule: in any civil action which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy.

Question 22

What are the mandatory exceptions to supplemental jurisdiction? (1367(b))

Answer 22

In any civil actions which the district court has original jurisdiction founded solely on Diversity Jurisdiction (§1332), the district courts shall not have supplemental jurisdiction under subsection (a) over claims by a plaintiff against persons made in joinder (Rules 14, 19, 20, or 24).

Question 23

When a question concerning whether a claim in joinder can be brought under supplemental jurisdiction, what is the analysis that must take place?

Answer 23

1) 1367(a) - Does the claim come from the same nucleus of operative fact (also known as forming the same case or controversy) as the original claim?
• If no, supplemental jurisdiction denied.
• If yes, go to 2.
2) [1367(b)] Is the ORIGINAL CLAIM brought under diversity?
• If no, supplemental jurisdiction allowed.
• If yes, go to 3.
3) [1367(b)] Is the claim that supplemental jurisdiction being sought for coming from a plaintiff?
• If no, supplemental jurisdiction allowed.
• If yes, no supplemental jurisdiction allowed.
4) §1367(b) – is the claim for supplemental jurisdiction brought from a joinder Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24?
• If no, supplemental jurisdiction allowed.
• If yes, no supplemental jurisdiction allowed.

Question 24

Rule 19:

What is the rule for compulsory joinder when it is feasible for a party to be joined?

Answer 24

(a) Persons to be joined if feasible
(1) A person who is subject to service of process and whose joinder will not deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction must be joined as a party if:
(A): The party is necessary to give proper relief to existing parties.
(B): That the party has an interest relating to the subject of the action and is situated so that disposing the lawsuit without them would result in:
(i) It would impair or impeded the outsiders ability to protect their interests; or
(ii) Leave an existing party subject to a substantial risk of double or multiple liability.

Question 25

Rule 19: What is the rule for when a compulsory joinder party cannot be feasibly joined?

Answer 25

(b) When Joinder of the required party is not feasible: If a person who is required to be joined, cannot be feasibly joined, the court must determine whether, in equity and good conscience, the action should proceed among the existing parties or should be dismissed. The factors for the court to consider include:
(1) The extent to which deciding the case in the parties absence would prejudice that person or the existing parties;
(2) The extent to which any prejudice could be lessened or avoided by:
• Protective provisions in the judgement;;
• Shaping of the relief given;
• Other measures available;
(3) Whether a judgement rendered in the person’s absence would be adequate; and
(4) Whether the Plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the action were dismissed for nonjoinder of parties.

Question 26

What cases can and cant Rule 19 be used for?

Answer 26

Rule 19 cannot be used for Tort cases. Rule 19 is often used in cases of joint property ownership, contract rights, or obligations between parties.

Question 27

Rule 24:

What is the rule for who may intervene by right?

Answer 27

24(a)- Intervention of Right- On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:

(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute; or
(2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant’s ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.

Question 28

What are the four requirements for intervention under 24(a)(2)?

Answer 28

24(a) (2) is the hard case. This involves a party on the outside looking in and must come in to protect its interests. But, if those interests are already adequately represented then the court will not allow them to come in.
4 requirements for intervention:
• 1) timeliness
• 2) Must have an interest
• 3) Must be a strong interest
• 4) Interest must not be well represented in the lawsuit.

Question 29

What is the Rule 22 rule for when a plaintiff may interpleader?

Answer 29

By a Plaintiff:
1) Persons with claims that may expose a plaintiff to double or multiple liability may be joined as defendants and required to interplead.
a) Joinder for interpleader is proper even though:
• The claims of the several claimants, or the titles of which their claims depend lack a common origin or are adverse and independent rather than identical.
• The plaintiff denies liability in whole or in part to any or all claimants.

Question 30

What is the Rule 22: interpleader rule for defendants?

Answer 30

A defendant exposed to similar liability may seek interpleader through a crossclaim or counter claim.

Question 31

Is statutory interpleader or Rule 22 used most often?

Answer 31

Statutory. Rule 22 is too difficult and narrow to ever be valuable.

Question 32

What is required under 1335, 1397, 2361 for Statutory Interpleader?

Answer 32

§1335 – Requirement of a minimum of $500 in dispute and that two claimants must have diversity from one another.
§1397 – Venue is allowed in any venue which at least one claimant resides
§2361 – Nationwide service of process is allowed.

Question 33

What are the differences between Statutory and Rule 22 Interpleader in this categories?

1) Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction - Diversity?
2) Amount Required?
3) Venue
4) Personal Jurisdiction requirements?
5) injunctions to freeze assets

Answer 33

1) Statute: Minimal diversity, determined between all claimants (Just two claimants need diversity).
Rule: Complete diversity, determined between stakeholder and claimants.
2) S: $500
R: $75,000
3) S: Residence of one of the claimants
R: Must meet ordinary jurisdiction rules; contacts with claimants required; service under Rule 4
4) S: Residence of one or more claimants
R: Ordinary venue rules under 1391
5) S: Specifically provided for interpleader cases under 2361
R: No specific basis; courts have been using 2361.