Finish Problems

1
Finish Problems

• 742 9(a) to (d)

2
Joinder of Parties

• Co-Plaintiffs
• Co-Defendants
• Counter-Claim Defendants
• Cross-Claim Defendants
• Third Party Defendants

3
Must ask both for each claim Authority?
Jurisdiction?

• What rule authorizes joinder of the nonparty as a
  party?
• 13(h) (joining a party to a cross or counter
  claim)
• 19 compulsory joinder
• 20(a) permissive joinder
• 14(a) (b) impleading parties

• Is there SMJ over the claim v. that party?
• 1331 OJ FQ
• 1332 OJ Diversity
• 1367 SJ (so long as theres one anchor claim)

Sort of the odd ball
4
Joinder by Plaintiff Same Standard to join Co-P
or Co-D

• Join a Co-Defendant
• Under FRCP 20(a)(2), a co-defendant can be joined
  by a plaintiff if (1) plaintiff asserts a claim
  for relief against that defendant which arises
  out of the same transaction asserted against the
  initial defendant and (2) there is a question of
  law or fact is common.
• Whether liability is asserted alternatively,
  jointly or severally.

• Join a Co-Plaintiff
• Under FRCP 20(a)(1), a co-plaintiff can be joined
  if (1) it asserts a right to relief arising out
  of the same transaction as the plaintiffs claim
  and (2) there is a question of law in fact in
  common.
• Whether the relief sought is joint, several, or
  in the alternative.

5
Mosley (742)

• Facts that led to suit?
• What did D.Ct. order?
• There was no final judgment -- so how was there
  an appeal?
• What is standard of review?
• Whats test for same transaction under 20(a)?
• (1)
• Absolute identity required?
• (2)
• Each plaintiff will suffer different damages.
  How can there be common questions?

• Why was (1) satisfied here? (2)?
• Is decision on the merits?
• What does App. Ct. order?
• Whats that mean for discovery and trial? See
  747 n.3.
• Why did parties care so much about joinder?

6
Rules 21 and 42 (747-48)

• Plaintiff joins other persons as defendants or
  plaintiffs, or joins multiple unrelated claims
  against a single defendant, or both.
• Defendant may argue joinder is improper.
• Look at Rule if authorized, then joinder is
  proper.
• Look at statute if no SMJ, then dismiss claim

• Even if joinder of the claim or party is proper,
  may the court order separate trials on some
  issues or claims? Severance of claims or
  parties?
• What does R21 do compared to R42?

7
Counterclaim Defendants

• If against an existing plaintiff, see Rule 13(a)
  and (b) and yesterday.
• Rule 13(h) (and PJ, Venue, and SMJ) limits the
  ability of a defendant to join a party to a
  counterclaim to 19 and 20
• Rule 20
• Rule 19 (later, but well see that its very
  narrow)

• So (see next slide)
• Can D join a party as a counterclaim defendant if
  it asserts a claim against it, but does not
  assert any counterclaim against the existing
  plaintiff?
• What if it asserts a counterclaim against an
  existing plaintiff, but the claim against the
  counterclaim defendant is unrelated to the
  counterclaim against the existing plaintiff?

8
Picto Gram
9
Cross-Claims

• 13(g) permits against existing parties
• Does it allow unrelated cross claims?

• 13(h) limits joinder of a party to a cross-claim
  just as it does as with joining parties to a
  counter-claim

10
Rule 14 Joining a Party Without Necessarily Also
Asserting a Claim Against an Existing Party

• But first a Brief Tutorial on Indemnity and
  Contribution

11
Indemnity (K) andDerivative Liability (tort)

• Suppose you apply for a loan, but the bank asks
  for your parents to sign instead. After you
  promise your parents that you will pay them back,
  you dont and bank sues them.
• Your parents can claim contractual indemnity
  (implied or express, depending on the facts).
• If the bank sued your parents, and there wasnt
  rule 14, could they bring you into that suit? See
  Rule 13(h) (and then 19 and 20). Do they allow
  your parents to join you to a suit by the bank
  against your parents?

• You run a 7-11. You buy your inventory from a big
  distributor. A customer gets sick after drinking
  a can of Coke you bought from the distributor, so
  sues you.
• You can sue the distributor for contribution or
  indemnity under tort law.
• If plaintiff sued you, and there wasnt Rule 14,
  could you bring the distributor into that suit?
  See Rule 13(h) (and 19 and 20). Do they allow
  joining the distributor?

12
Impleader under Rule 14

• A defendant who sues a third party is called a
  third-party plaintiff.
• The party sued by the third-party plaintiff is a
  third-party defendant.

• A defendant can sue a third party who is or
  may be liable to the defendant for all or a
  part of the plaintiffs claim against the
  defendant.

13
If I owe plaintiff, you owe me not plaintiff
shoulda sued you, not me.

• Price (748)
• Facts that led to suit?
• Who did plaintiff sue?
• Who did defendant implead?
• What was the substantive legal theory that made
  it possible?

• Is court correct that once Latco had anchor claim
  against ITW, R18 let it add addl claims?
• Is there SMJ?
• Why under 1367 will there always be SJ over
  claims by defendants under Rule 14?

14
Problems 752-53

• (a)
• (b)
• (c)

15
Rule 14 How/When/What

• See handout on course web page. We wont cover
  in class. It just diagrams the rule so you can
  see what it allows.

16
Problems 754

• 1
• 2
• 3 (be sure you understand his reasoning)