What Is Joinder of Parties in a Civil Lawsuit?

Joinder of parties in a U.S. civil lawsuit

When a civil dispute involves more than one person or business, it is not always necessary to file a separate lawsuit against every person involved. In some situations, multiple plaintiffs or defendants can be included in the same civil case. This is generally known as joinder of parties.

Joinder can make litigation more efficient because related claims can sometimes be resolved in one lawsuit instead of several separate cases. At the same time, courts do not allow unrelated parties to be combined simply because their disputes happen to involve similar circumstances.

In federal civil cases, the rules governing joinder are primarily found in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rules 19, 20, and 21. State courts have their own procedural rules, which may differ.

What Does Joinder of Parties Mean?

Joinder of parties is the process of bringing two or more plaintiffs or defendants into the same civil lawsuit when the applicable procedural rules permit or require them to be included.

For example, imagine that three people are injured in the same car accident and all three claim that the same driver was responsible. Depending on the circumstances and applicable procedural rules, the injured people may be able to bring their claims together.

Similarly, if two companies are allegedly responsible for the same harm, a plaintiff may be able to name both companies as defendants in one lawsuit.

The basic idea is simple: when multiple parties have sufficiently connected legal claims or interests, the court may allow—or sometimes require—them to participate in the same case.

The Federal Rules recognize different forms of party joinder, including required joinder under Rule 19 and permissive joinder under Rule 20.

Why Do Courts Allow Joinder?

Joinder can prevent unnecessary duplication of litigation.

If several people have claims arising from the same event, requiring separate lawsuits could mean repeating discovery, presenting the same witnesses multiple times, and asking different courts or judges to consider substantially similar evidence.

Combining appropriate parties can therefore promote efficiency and help avoid inconsistent results. The legal system generally seeks to avoid unnecessary multiple lawsuits involving the same underlying dispute.

However, efficiency alone does not automatically justify joinder. The claims and parties must satisfy the applicable procedural requirements.

Permissive Joinder Under Federal Rule 20

One of the most important rules concerning joinder of parties in federal civil litigation is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20.

Rule 20 permits multiple plaintiffs to join in one lawsuit when their claims arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences and there is at least one question of law or fact common to all plaintiffs.

The rule also permits multiple defendants to be joined when the claims against them arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences and there is at least one common question of law or fact.

In practical terms, two important questions usually arise:

Are the claims connected to the same transaction or occurrence, or a related series of events?
Is there a common question of law or fact?

If both requirements are satisfied, permissive joinder may be available under Rule 20.

Example of Permissive Joinder

Suppose a construction company operates a worksite, and several workers are injured during the same incident because of an alleged safety failure.

If the workers' claims arise from the same incident and involve common factual or legal questions, they may potentially be joined as plaintiffs, subject to the applicable procedural requirements.

Joinder does not mean that every plaintiff must have exactly the same damages or legal claim. Their individual claims can still differ while sharing the required connection.

Joinder of Multiple Defendants

Joinder can also involve defendants.

For example, suppose a customer purchases a defective product and alleges that both the manufacturer and distributor contributed to the injury.

Depending on the facts, the plaintiff may seek to sue both defendants in the same lawsuit if the claims satisfy the requirements for joinder.

The important point is that simply naming several defendants in one complaint does not automatically make the joinder proper. The claims against those defendants must have the required factual and legal connection.

Required Joinder Under Rule 19

Permissive joinder is different from required joinder.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 addresses circumstances in which a person should be joined if feasible.

Generally, Rule 19 can require joinder when, in that person's absence, the court cannot provide complete relief among the existing parties, or when the absent person claims an interest relating to the lawsuit and proceeding without that person could impair their ability to protect that interest or expose an existing party to a substantial risk of multiple or inconsistent obligations.

This is sometimes described as mandatory or compulsory joinder.

A Simple Example

Imagine that a lawsuit concerns ownership rights in property and a third person has a significant legal interest in that same property.

If the court's decision could substantially affect that person's interests, the person may need to be joined if the applicable requirements of Rule 19 are satisfied and joinder is feasible.

The purpose is to allow the court to resolve the dispute fairly while protecting the interests of people who could be directly affected by the judgment.

What Happens If a Required Party Cannot Be Joined?

Sometimes a person who should be joined cannot be added.

For example, joinder might not be feasible because the court lacks personal jurisdiction over that person, or because adding the person would create a jurisdictional problem.

In that situation, Rule 19 requires the court to consider whether the lawsuit can fairly proceed without the absent person.

The court considers factors such as the potential prejudice to the absent person or existing parties, whether that prejudice can be reduced or avoided, whether a judgment entered without the person would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the action were dismissed.

Therefore, the absence of a potentially required party does not always automatically mean that the case must be dismissed.

What Is Misjoinder?

Misjoinder occurs when parties are improperly joined in a lawsuit.

For example, suppose a plaintiff brings claims against three defendants, but one defendant has no meaningful connection to the transaction or occurrence underlying the lawsuit and the claims against that defendant do not share the required common questions of law or fact.

The court may determine that the defendant was improperly joined.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 addresses misjoinder and nonjoinder. Importantly, misjoinder is not itself a reason to dismiss the entire lawsuit. The court may instead add or drop parties or sever a claim against a party on appropriate terms.

Joinder Does Not Mean Everyone Has the Same Claim

A common misunderstanding is that parties can only be joined when their claims are identical.

That is not necessarily true.

Two plaintiffs may have different damages, different evidence, or somewhat different legal theories while still having claims arising from the same transaction or occurrence and sharing common questions of law or fact.

For example, two people injured in the same accident could have different medical expenses and different levels of injury. Their individual damages may be different even though their claims arise from the same event.

The procedural requirements—not whether every detail is identical—determine whether joinder is appropriate.

Joinder of Parties vs. Joinder of Claims

Joinder of parties should not be confused with joinder of claims.

Party joinder concerns who is participating in the lawsuit.

Claim joinder concerns the different legal claims being brought in the same action.

For example, a plaintiff may have several claims against the same defendant. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 18 generally addresses the joinder of claims and permits a party asserting a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim to join as many claims as it has against an opposing party, subject to applicable rules and jurisdictional requirements.

So, a lawsuit can involve both multiple parties and multiple claims.

Joinder vs. Consolidation

Joinder is also different from consolidation.

Joinder generally concerns adding multiple parties or claims to the same lawsuit.

Consolidation usually concerns combining separate cases that are already pending.

For example, if two related lawsuits are already filed, a court may consider whether they should be consolidated under the applicable procedural rules.

That is different from deciding whether several plaintiffs or defendants should be included in the first place.

Can a Judge Remove a Party from a Lawsuit?

Yes.

If a party has been improperly joined, or if another procedural problem exists, the court can take steps to correct the case.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, the court may, on motion or on its own, add or drop a party at any time and on just terms. The court may also sever a claim against a party.

This means that an improperly joined party does not necessarily cause the entire case to disappear.

Instead, the court may restructure the case so that the remaining claims and parties can proceed appropriately.

Does Joinder Automatically Mean One Trial?

No.

Even when parties are properly joined, the court retains significant authority over case management.

Depending on the circumstances, the court may use procedural tools such as separate trials or other protective measures when combining parties could create unfair prejudice, unnecessary delay, expense, or other problems.

Federal civil procedure therefore attempts to balance two competing concerns: efficient resolution of related disputes and fairness to each individual party.

Why Is Joinder Important in Civil Litigation?

Joinder can have a significant practical effect on a lawsuit.

When appropriate parties are included in one action, the court may be able to resolve related factual and legal issues more efficiently.

It can also reduce duplicative discovery and avoid requiring witnesses and parties to participate in multiple proceedings involving substantially similar facts.

But improper joinder can create the opposite problem. It can make a case unnecessarily complicated and may unfairly burden parties whose disputes are not sufficiently connected.

That is why federal procedural rules establish specific requirements rather than allowing unlimited joinder.

What Should a Plaintiff Consider Before Joining Defendants?

A plaintiff considering multiple defendants should not simply ask, "Can I name everyone involved?"

The more important questions include:

Do the claims arise from the same transaction, occurrence, or series of related events?
Is there a common question of law or fact?
Is any party required under Rule 19?
Does the court have jurisdiction over each proposed party?
Are venue and service requirements satisfied?
Could joining a party affect federal subject-matter jurisdiction?
Would separate claims be more appropriate?
Could joinder create unnecessary delay or prejudice?

These questions can become particularly important in federal litigation involving diversity jurisdiction, because adding a party can sometimes affect the court's jurisdiction.

What Is the Difference Between Joinder and Intervention?

Joinder and intervention are related concepts, but they are not the same.

Joinder generally concerns bringing parties into a lawsuit under the applicable joinder rules.

Intervention generally involves a person who is not already a party seeking permission—or, in certain circumstances, having a right—to enter an existing lawsuit because of an interest in the litigation.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 governs intervention.

The distinction can matter because the procedural requirements and rights involved are different.

Does Every Civil Lawsuit Have to Include Every Person Involved?

No.

A lawsuit does not automatically have to include every person who has some connection to the underlying events.

Some people may be proper parties but not necessary parties. Others may have no sufficient legal connection to the claims to be joined at all.

Rule 19 deals with required parties, while Rule 20 deals with permissive joinder. The applicable jurisdiction and facts determine which rules apply.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is joinder of parties in civil procedure?

Joinder of parties is the process of including multiple plaintiffs or defendants in the same civil lawsuit when the applicable procedural rules permit or require their participation.

What rule governs permissive joinder?

In federal civil cases, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 governs permissive joinder of parties. It generally requires the claims to arise from the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences and involve a common question of law or fact.

What rule governs required joinder?

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 governs required joinder of parties in federal civil litigation.

What happens if parties are improperly joined?

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, the court may add or drop parties or sever claims. Misjoinder itself is not a basis for automatically dismissing the entire action.

Can multiple plaintiffs sue the same defendant?

Yes, potentially. Multiple plaintiffs may be joined when the requirements for permissive joinder are satisfied, including the required connection between their claims and a common question of law or fact.

Can multiple defendants be included in one lawsuit?

Yes. Multiple defendants may be joined when the claims against them satisfy the applicable procedural requirements.

Is joinder the same as consolidation?

No. Joinder generally concerns bringing parties or claims into one lawsuit, while consolidation generally concerns combining separate lawsuits that are already pending.

Conclusion

Joinder of parties is an important part of civil procedure because it determines when multiple people or entities can—or must—participate in the same lawsuit.

In federal court, Rule 19 addresses required joinder, Rule 20 addresses permissive joinder, and Rule 21 provides procedures for dealing with misjoinder and nonjoinder.

The central idea is straightforward: related disputes may be handled together when the procedural requirements are satisfied, but unrelated parties generally should not be forced into the same lawsuit.

Because joinder can affect jurisdiction, venue, discovery, litigation strategy, and the parties' legal rights, anyone involved in a civil case should carefully review the applicable federal or state procedural rules before deciding whom to include in a lawsuit.

Sources

Disclaimer

This article provides general legal information for educational purposes and is not legal advice. Federal and state procedural rules can differ, and the correct application of joinder rules depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. If you are involved in active litigation or are deciding whether to add or remove a party from a lawsuit, consider consulting a qualified attorney licensed in the relevant jurisdiction.

Search This Blog

Petitioner's Legal Guide

Petitioner's Legal Guide