In Archer Western Contractors LLC v. McDonnel Group, LLC, the Fifth Circuit applied its precedent in Moss v. Princip to hold that a partnership—and by extension a joint venture—is not necessarily indispensable when each of its partners is a party and “relief can be tailored to reduce prejudice to the absent partnership.” The court also noted that a Rule 17(a) real-party-in-interest argument does not bear on the Rule 19 joinder analysis, because “the fact that an absent person could bring the action as a real party in interest does not of itself make that person a necessary or indispensable party.” No. 25-30321 (Mar. 26, 2026).
Category Archives: Joinder
The Fifth Circuit reversed the trial court’s dismissal of a case under Fed. R. Civ. P. 19, for problems with party joinder, in PHH Mortgage Co. v. Old Republic Nat’l Title Ins. Co.
The key distinction that led to reversal was this: “The [Texas] trespass-to-try-title statute applies only when ‘the claimant is seeking to establish or obtain the claimant’s ownership or possessory right in the land at issue,'” while “a breach of contract claim against a title insurance company ‘invokes the insurer’s obligation to pay the claim or defend title to the property, and this claim is separate and distinct from the claim of ownership.'” No. 22-50930 (citations omitted).