Rule 19.Joinder of Persons Needed for Just Adjudication

Rule 15-6-19 protects both absent people and the parties already in a lawsuit from an incomplete or unfair resolution. Subdivision (a) requires joining a person subject to service of process as a party when, without them, complete relief cannot be given to those already in the case, or when that person claims an interest in the subject of the action and their absence might practically impair their ability to protect that interest, or might leave the existing parties exposed to double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations. If such a person should be a plaintiff but will not join voluntarily, they can be made a defendant or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff — though if joining them would defeat venue, they must be dismissed from the action instead.

Subdivision (b) covers what happens when that kind of person cannot be joined at all — for instance, because the court cannot get jurisdiction over them. The court must then decide, in equity and good conscience, whether the action should proceed among the existing parties or be dismissed with the absent person regarded as indispensable. The rule lists four factors guiding that decision: how much a judgment in the person’s absence might prejudice them or those already parties, how much that prejudice can be lessened through protective measures or shaping the relief, whether a judgment rendered without the absent person would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the case were dismissed instead.

Subdivisions (c) and (d) round out the rule. Subdivision (c) requires a pleading asserting a claim for relief to name any known person who fits subdivision (a) but has not been joined, and to explain why. Subdivision (d) makes this rule subject to the class action rule in Rule 15-6-23, recognizing that class litigation raises its own framework for representing absent interests.