JOINDER. “Under the Rules, the impulse is toward entertaining the broadest possible scope of action consistent with fairness to the parties; joinder of claims, parties and remedies is strongly encouraged.”. Joinder Rules. Claims 18 Joinder of Claims (not compulsory)
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
“Under the Rules, the impulse is toward entertaining the broadest possible scope of action consistent with fairness to the parties; joinder of claims, parties and remedies is strongly encouraged.”
Policy Justifications: allows a party to resolve multiple disputes against the same D in one action which is cheaper than having to bring them in a separate suit.
There is no rule that compels joinder of claims; however, SOL and former adjudication operate to motivate plaintiffs to join several claims against a defendant.
There is no relatedness requirement between several claims brought vs. a defendant.
A party (plaintiff or defendant) can use Rule 18 to add claims to an original first party claim, to a counterclaim, to a cross-claim or a third-party claim.
Rule 42(b) affords a trial court the discretion to order separate trials where the addition of claims renders a case unmanageable.
Policy Justification: to promote trial convenience and expedite the final determination of disputes, thereby preventing multiple lawsuits
Policy Justifications: efficiency, cost effective, prevents conflicting outcomes by binding impleaded party to the findings in the original case
Cohen v. Republic of the Philippines
(p. 786) gives us an opportunity to consider the factual scenario that gives rise to interpleader and test our understanding of intervention
P (GA) is injured in a car accident, has retained an atty, and is considering suing D (FL) for her injuries to her car and her body. It just so happens that D is her landlord who has failed (in her opinion) to maintain the property she is leasing in a manner consistent with the lease.
P has failed to pay rent for the past 3 months b/c of her dissatisfaction with the condition of the apartment she is leasing.
1) Can D initiate a claim for breach of contract as part of P’s law suit against him?
2) P passed out fliers to her neighbors referring to D as a “slumlord.” Can D initiate a claim for defamation vs. P as part of her law suit against him?
3) If D decides not to initiate either claim as part of P’s suit vs him will it impact his ability to do so at a later date?
D entered into a contract with C (GA) to maintain all of his apartment buildings. C failed to visit the apartment building as required by the contract.
Several of P’s neighbors, equally unhappy with the condition of the apartment building in which they live, want to join the lawsuit. They are all GA citizens.
1) Can they join the law suit?
P decides to add to her claims for breach of contract and negligence vs. D a claim for the return of her security deposit. P and her roommate E (FL) split the deposit (each paying half) and both P and her roommate are on the lease. P is requesting the return of the entire amount plus interest.