Joinder

Question 1

1) Plant v. Blazer

Answer 1

1. Holding:
   i) A counterclaim is compulsory if it arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim and there is a logical connection between the claim and counterclaim.

Question 2

1) Mosley v. GM corp.

Answer 2

1. Facts:
   i) P class action sues the D, D tries to have the case dismissed making the P file separate claims for different cases of employment discrimination. The court rules against the D
   
   2. Holding:
      i) governing permissive joinder of plaintiffs, provides that persons may join in one action as plaintiffs if (1) they have asserted a right to relief arising out of the same transaction or occurrences and (2) a question of law or fact common to all the parties will arise in the action.

Question 3

1) Price v. CTB

Answer 3

1. Facts:
   i) Chicken farmer has the D build him a chicken roost building, later the building fails and collapses killing all the chickens. P sues the D who impleads the nail manufaturer who should have warrantied the faulty nails.
   
   2. Holding:
      A defendant may implead and assert a claim against a third party only when the defendant is trying to pass all or part of the liability onto that third party. Rule 14 allows them to do so.

Question 4

1) Temple v. Synthes Corp

Answer 4

1. Facts:
   i) P sues Synthes and the doctor and hospitals for malpractice when a screw broke off causing further harm. D has the case dismissed for failure to join a party, Scotus grants cert and says you done fucked up.
   2. Holding:
   It is not necessary for all joint tortfeasors to be named as defendants in a single lawsuit because joint tortfeasors are merely permissive parties. SCOTUS says only necessary and indispensable parties must be joined

Question 5

2) Helzberg’s Diamond Shops v. Valley West Mall

Answer 5

1. Facts:
   i) Diamond shop sues mall for breach of contract when they grant another lease to a similar type of store. The mall motions to dismiss the case for failure to join under rule 19. The court says they are not required to join them as they are separate parties with completely different leases.
   
   2. Holding:
      Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that when a person cannot be made a party to a lawsuit, the court must determine whether the action should proceed without that particular party, or whether it should be dismissed. An indispensable party is a party who, if absent from the lawsuit, could cause a judgment to be prejudicial to the participating parties in the litigation.