Skip to content

RULE 19. JOINDER OF PERSONS NEEDED FOR JUST ADJUDICATION

July 25, 2011

RULE 19.01: PERSONS TO BE JOINED IF FEASIBLE.

A person who is subject to service of process shall be joined as a party if (1) in the person’s absence complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties, or (2) the person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in the person’s absence may (i) as a practical matter impair or impede the person’s ability to protect that interest, or (ii) leave any of the persons already parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reasons of the claimed interest. If the person has not been so joined, the court shall order that the person be made a party. If the person properly should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, he or she may be made a defendant, or in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff. [As amended by order entered January 28, 2000, effective July 1, 2000, and by order effective July 1, 2005.]

RULE 19.02: DETERMINATION BY COURT WHENEVER JOINDER NOT FEASIBLE.

If a person as described in Rule 19.01 (1) – (2) hereof cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it; or should be stayed or dismissed, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable. The factors to be considered by the court include: (1) to what extent a judgment rendered in the person’s absence might be prejudicial to the person or those already parties; (2) the extent to which, by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided; (3) whether or not a judgment rendered in the person’s absence will be adequate; and (4) whether or not the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder.

RULE 19.03: PLEADING REASONS FOR NONJOINDER.

A pleading asserting a claim for relief shall state the names, if known to the pleader, of any persons as described in Rule 19.01 (1) – (2) hereof who are not joined, and the reasons why they are not joined.

RULE 19.04: EXCEPTION OF CLASS ACTIONS.

This rule is subject to the provisions of Rule 23.

Advisory Commission Comments [2000]. The original version of 19.01 contained the following language:”This rule shall be construed to allow joint tortfeasors and obligors on obligations that are joint and several to be sued either jointly or severally.” The Supreme Court’s adoption of comparative fault, where tort liability is several rather than joint, makes the sentence incorrect in part. Samuelson v. McMurtry, 962 S.W.2d 473 (Tenn. 1998), requires that comparative tortfeasors be joined in a single lawsuit.

Advisory Commission Comment [2005]. The first sentence of Rule 19.01 is changed to refer to “service of process” rather than “jurisdiction” to make clear that personal rather than subject matter jurisdiction is intended.

Advertisements
Leave a Comment

Don't be shy! Leave a Reply!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: