Rule 39.Joinder of Persons Needed for Just Adjudication

Last amended January 1, 1971 · Last verified June 28, 2026

In one sentenceRule 39 requires joining a person whose absence would prevent complete relief or impair their interest, and tells the court how to decide — proceed or dismiss — when that person cannot be joined.

Full Text of Rule 39

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) Persons to Be Joined If Feasible. A person who is subject to service of process shall be joined as a party in the action if

(1) in his absence complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties, or

(2) he claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in his absence may

(i) as a practical matter impair or impede his 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 reason of his claimed interest. If he has not been so joined, the court shall order that he be made a party. If he should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, he may be made a defendant, or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff.

(b) Determination by Court Whenever Joinder Not Feasible. If a person as described in subdivision (a)(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 dismissed, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable. The factors to be considered by the court include: first, to what extent a judgment rendered in the person's absence might be prejudicial to him or those already parties; second, 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; third, whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence will be adequate; fourth, whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for non-joinder.

(c) 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 subdivision (a)(1)-(2) hereof who are not joined, and the reasons why they are not joined.

(d) Exception of Class Actions. This rule is subject to the provisions of Rule 42.

End

Plain-English Summary

Rule 39 is the compulsory-joinder rule. A person subject to service must be joined if their absence would keep the court from granting complete relief among the existing parties, or if they claim an interest that the case could impair, or that could leave a current party facing double or inconsistent obligations. If such a person has not been joined, the court orders it.

Sometimes the person cannot be joined. Then the court decides, in equity and good conscience, whether to go ahead without them or dismiss — treating the absent person as indispensable. It weighs four factors: the prejudice to the absent person or existing parties, whether that prejudice can be lessened by shaping the relief, whether a judgment without the person would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff would have another remedy if the case is dismissed.

A pleading that seeks relief must name any known person who should be joined but is not, and say why. The rule gives way to the class-action rule, Rule 42.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who must be joined as a party under Rule 39?

A person subject to service whose absence would prevent complete relief, or who claims an interest the case could impair or that could expose an existing party to double or inconsistent obligations.

What happens if a needed party can't be joined?

The court decides in equity and good conscience whether to proceed without them or dismiss, weighing prejudice, whether relief can be shaped to avoid it, the adequacy of a judgment, and whether the plaintiff has another remedy. A person who cannot be joined and whose presence is essential is treated as indispensable.

Source & verification. Rule text and the official Notes and Comments are reproduced verbatim from the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (Tex. R. Civ. P. 39), published by the Texas Judicial Branch (txcourts.gov). Promulgated by the Supreme Court of Texas. The plain-English summary is original and draws on official sources. Last verified June 28, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: joinder of persons needed for just adjudicationcompulsory joinderindispensable partynecessary partyTRCP 39