Civil Procedure notes- Joinder of Claims
Civil Procedure
Joinder of Claims
Scope of dispute may expand, but most of the time we’re talking about the same parties and circumstances- relating back
By Defendant- Counter claims Rule 13, compulsory v. permissive counterclaims, both parties believe they are the plaintiff- determined by who gets to court first
Leave behind process of joining claims between exact same parties
Plaintiff sues one or more defendants, someone realizes that missing or not having the right party members
Rule 20(a)- Persons who may join or be joined
Mosley v. General Motors Corp.
Mosley and 9 other employees raise race discrimination and gender discrimination claims
Federal questions in play- Federal Statutes 42 U.S.C. 2000e and 1981
Procedural Question- May all 10 Plaintiffs sue in same lawsuit? District court says no, must file 10 separate complaints. Court of Appeals reverses and remands the decision.
The factor that unites all of the plaintiffs is that they were all under the same non-discriminatory contract
The Union is not paying attention to race as it should- becomes a policy issue
Question of law or fact common to all P’s
Point of case- not just a free for all, but same transaction or occurrence can be flexible
Plaintiff could be biting off more than it can chew
Same transaction or occurrence can be very flexible- district and appeals courts in Mosley case had opposing rulings with different opinions
Class action suits- example: drug commercials (suit includes everyone who has taken Zoloft); what makes it a class action versus a multiple plaintiff case is that we can’t reasonably identify everyone in the class with substantial certainty. Must have 1) numerosity and 2) so hard to identify.
Class Action v. Mass Action
Permissive Joinder (of Multiple Defendants)- example: Speedway walkway collapse; Must be some kind of commonality
12(b)(7) defense: failure to join a necessary party
Rule 19: some people have to be parties in lawsuits:
Court can’t
Joinder of Claims
Scope of dispute may expand, but most of the time we’re talking about the same parties and circumstances- relating back
By Defendant- Counter claims Rule 13, compulsory v. permissive counterclaims, both parties believe they are the plaintiff- determined by who gets to court first
Leave behind process of joining claims between exact same parties
Plaintiff sues one or more defendants, someone realizes that missing or not having the right party members
Rule 20(a)- Persons who may join or be joined
Mosley v. General Motors Corp.
Mosley and 9 other employees raise race discrimination and gender discrimination claims
Federal questions in play- Federal Statutes 42 U.S.C. 2000e and 1981
Procedural Question- May all 10 Plaintiffs sue in same lawsuit? District court says no, must file 10 separate complaints. Court of Appeals reverses and remands the decision.
The factor that unites all of the plaintiffs is that they were all under the same non-discriminatory contract
The Union is not paying attention to race as it should- becomes a policy issue
Question of law or fact common to all P’s
Point of case- not just a free for all, but same transaction or occurrence can be flexible
Plaintiff could be biting off more than it can chew
Same transaction or occurrence can be very flexible- district and appeals courts in Mosley case had opposing rulings with different opinions
Class action suits- example: drug commercials (suit includes everyone who has taken Zoloft); what makes it a class action versus a multiple plaintiff case is that we can’t reasonably identify everyone in the class with substantial certainty. Must have 1) numerosity and 2) so hard to identify.
Class Action v. Mass Action
Permissive Joinder (of Multiple Defendants)- example: Speedway walkway collapse; Must be some kind of commonality
12(b)(7) defense: failure to join a necessary party
Rule 19: some people have to be parties in lawsuits:
Court can’t