{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Civil Procedure 2 Outline - Civil Procedure 2 Outline A...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Civil Procedure 2 Outline A. Intervention (Rule 24) a. Generally i. defined -allows strangers to the lawsuit to join to protect their rights ii. Court does not consider PJ or Venue, but SMJ can always be challenged iii. Court looks to face of complaint and discovery for determination iv. Party generally doesn’t ask for a or b, just to intervene v. stare decisis -a 2d court can disagree with the first court vi. claim preclusion -a 2d court must agree with the first court vii. do not talk about necessary parties on test unless he says to!!! b. Permissive Intervention (24b) – Requires Below Three i. Grounds – either: 1. federal statute grants a conditional right to intervene 2. new claim has common question of law/fact with existing claim ii. Must be timely (the sooner the better) iii. Must get court’s agreement 1. court has great discretion and this is rarely overturned on appeal c. Intervention of Right (24a) – Requires Below Four i. Must be timely as to not prejudice existing parties, which is measured by: 1. the “stage of the proceeding” at which intervenor files the motion 2. whether adding the party would prejudice existing parties 3. any reasons justifying the delay a. note this is the sole issue for which court has discretion ii. Must have significantly protectable legal interest 1. new party’s interest must be both direct and legally protectable a. stare decisis effect on a potential future claim is not enough b. interest is pretty much the same as Rule 19 interest c. LP interest =could intervenor bring a claim on their own? i. economic interest alone is not enough 1. i.e. interested alone is not enough for this, but can be for permissive ii. exception -if claim being made is of sufficient importance and no one else is representing it 2. must relate to property/transaction which is subject of the action 3. trend is to relax this requirement, esp. with public interests iii. Above interest must be practically impaired (hard question) 1. stare decisis only if the parties are fighting over exact same thing a. example: same property & uranium license (E’s p. 284) 2. also when the effect of the action permanently changes something a. example: knock down a historic building iv. New party cannot already have adequate representation 1. present if the parties do not emphasize the same points v. Note - timely + statute giving unconditional right to intervene is also enough B. Compulsory Joinder (Rule 19) a. Generally i. primarily used as a defense (12b7 – failure to join indispensable party) Complete as of 4/19/2011 Page 1 of 38
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1. court will just order the new party to be joined, unless they can’t ii. also allows for a Π to be brought into a suit against their will iii. see bottom analysis for when SMJ, PJ, and Venue must be considered iv. note that joint tortfeasors are not usually necessary parties v. if you are necessary, you can intervene as of right, unless your interests are being adequately represented b. Three Ways a Party Can be Necessary i. If in the new party’s “absence, complete relief cannot be accorded among
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}