FRCP · Rule 19

FRCP Rule 19

Quick Answer

What is FRCP Rule 19?

FRCP Rule 19 outlines the requirements for necessary and indispensable parties in federal civil litigation.

Source: FRCP Rule 19

Official Text
A person who is not a party to the action shall be joined as a party if: (1) in the person's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties; or (2) the person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that disposing of the action in the person's absence may as a practical matter impair or impede the person's ability to protect that interest, or leave an existing party subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of the claimed interest. (b) If a joined party is indispensable under this rule and cannot be joined, the court must dismiss the action.
Plain Language

Rule 19 identifies when a person or entity must be included in a lawsuit to ensure that all parties' interests are adequately protected. If a necessary party cannot be joined, the court may dismiss the action to avoid unfairness to the absent party.

Purpose

The purpose of Rule 19 is to promote fair and efficient resolution of disputes by ensuring that all necessary parties are present in a litigation. This rule seeks to prevent multiple lawsuits and conflicting judgments.

Key Provisions

19(a)(1)

A party must be joined if their absence prevents the court from providing complete relief to existing parties.

19(a)(2)

A party must be joined if they have a significant interest in the action and their absence would impede their ability to protect that interest.

19(b)

If an indispensable party cannot be joined, the court may dismiss the lawsuit.

Practice Notes
  • Assess whether absent parties have interests related to the case before moving to trial.
  • Prepare to address potential motions to join additional parties early in the litigation process.
  • Understand the criteria for 'indispensable' parties, as it can determine the course of the litigation.
Landmark Cases

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. EPA

The court emphasized the importance of joining necessary parties in environmental lawsuits to ensure comprehensive remedies.

Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson

This case illustrated the principles of indispensable parties and when a case should be dismissed due to their absence.

Common Motions
  • motion to join parties
  • motion to dismiss for failure to join necessary parties
Exam Tip

Be prepared to discuss the implications of Rule 19 on case strategy and the necessity of parties in hypothetical examination scenarios.

Related Rules
  • frcp-rule-20
  • frcp-rule-21

Master Federal Rules with Briefly

Get AI-powered study tools, practice questions, and comprehensive legal resources.