Party Joinder
Mosley v. General Motors
- 10 plaintiffs suing GM, alleging discrimination, some African-American, some women, lots of different issues that each has.
- Want to challenge discriminatory practices of GM.
- Each can sue on their own—can they join together as plaintiffs?
- See Rule 20: multiple plaintiffs can join together—or a single plaintiff can join multiple defendant’s—provided
- 1. that all the plaintiffs/defendants joined are alleged to have been involved in same transaction or series of related transactions; and
- 2. at least one common question of law or fact unite all the parties and claims. (Yeazell, p. 743.)
- Question of law or fact common to all persons (“common question”).
- 8th Circuit says: policy of discrimination unites all claims
- This case represents how generous Rule 20 is, especially in cases of discrimination.
- Why does GM want to break up this lawsuit?
- A parade of 10 people telling stories, makes it appear less coincidental—it's an accumulation effect.
- Technically even if all 10 people weren't parties, other 9 could be witnesses...
- but rules of evidence may not be as generous in allowing non-party witnesses to testify.
- Shows how generous Rule 20 is! More generous than evidence.
- If each of 10 plaintiffs has to hire own lawyer, harder for each one—instead of pooling resources to get one lawyer for all.
