Top Law Schools

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?

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?

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?

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.

edit: 3|ink got it.