Get these flashcards, study & pass exams. For free! Even on iPhone/Android!

Permissive Joinder of Parties
Is 15 months of police brutality to 8 members of the same family "the same transaction or occurrence or series of such"?

H - it may be.  We need to allow discovery to be sure.  Dismissal request by Ds fails.

Notes:
Convenient trial package.
Same evidence.

Permissive Joinder, three former smokers.

H - permissive joinder not allowed, not same evidence, not common question of law or fact, not convenient trial package, b/c each of the three had vastly different histories.  Weren't showing a consistent pattern of conspiracy in the tobacco cos.

Compulsory Joinder.  Was Underwood necessary and indispensible? (w/o pty, relief cannot be granted.  OR missing pty has interest which would be impeded in absence OR risk inconsistent allegations.)

H - Relief could be granted in Underwood's absence.  Underwood didn't have an interest, b/c federal outcome would not be precedent for ongoing state litigation against Underwood. (Issue preclusion must be reasonably likely as a result, not just possible, and usually only occurs if parties are in privity, i.e. have some right of control). 

Notes: Joint tortfeasors who may have to pay full amt if their co-feasor is not brought in is not "inconsistent allegations," b/c you know this at the start when you agree to a joint venture.  Thus, Shepard Niles is SOL if Underwood isn't found liable in the state thing, even though they're joint tortfeasors.

Like Janney, similar suits pending in state and federal ct.  Co-beneficiaries of a trust, necessary parties in the federal suit brought by another beneficiary against the trustee. Came out differently - due to the fact that it was a complicated large doc, rather than (in Janney) an oral joint venture.

Janney
Pulitzer
Insolia
Kedra