Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Three themes:
1) notice 2) transactional test 3) party autonomy
Joinder: Modern U.S. civil process as distinguished from earlier common law and other systems Liberal pleadings Broad Joinder
Whole controversy as the aim The transactional test
Broad discovery
State power in private hands Deep bite, broad scope
A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim may join, as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing party
Note: Why permissive? Is it really permissive?
Rule 20
Allows joining more plaintiffs & defendants from (A) same t/o and (B) common question of law or fact
Compare:
Rule 21 Misjoinder and Nonjoinder with Rule 42 Consolidation/Separate trials Who is likely to use these rules? When in the course of litigation are these rules useful? How are the effects of these rules different?
10
11
12
Counterclaims Recapitulated
Failure to assert compulsory counterclaim results in waiver: defendant barred from bringing it in separate suit. If its a compulsory counterclaim, federal court will have subject matter jurisdiction to hear the claim (supplemental jurisdiction will attach)
13
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
Compare: rule 20
14
17
Suppose:
1) Assuming the federal court has subject matter jurisdiction, does the joinder rule (rule 18) allow this state law claim to be joined to the Title VII action? 2) does rule 15 allow plaintiffs amendment? Whats defendants strongest argument? Does the added claim relate back? 3) What if defendant wants to counterclaim for tort that plaintiff had destroyed some office equipment while employed? Is this a compulsory counterclaim or permissive counterclaim? What does it depend on?
20
21
22