Impleader question Forum
-
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:01 pm
Impleader question
I'm a little confused how come in Rule 14(A)(3) allows a plaintiff's claim against a third-party defendant, but under 1367 it will not allow a plaintiff to make a claim against a party made under rule 14?
- 3|ink
- Posts: 7393
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm
Re: Impleader question
Read the end of 1367(b). It's only when that would destroy diversity.SKlei wrote:I'm a little confused how come in Rule 14(A)(3) allows a plaintiff's claim against a third-party defendant, but under 1367 it will not allow a plaintiff to make a claim against a party made under rule 14?
- Judge Philip Banks
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:21 pm
Re: Impleader question
It doesn't allow supplemental jx in that situation IF ALLOWING IT WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH 1332 (i.e., ruins diversity). Everyone forgets about that last sentence of 1367(b). So, for example, if plaintiff asserts a 1331 claim against the third party defendant, that is fine.SKlei wrote:I'm a little confused how come in Rule 14(A)(3) allows a plaintiff's claim against a third-party defendant, but under 1367 it will not allow a plaintiff to make a claim against a party made under rule 14?
edit: 3|ink got it.