Define: Pretensive Joinder

Pretensive joinder refers to the inclusion of a party in a lawsuit solely for the purpose of defeating diversity jurisdiction.

Pretensive joinder can impact a lawsuit by preventing the removal of a case to federal court if diversity jurisdiction is a requirement.

Yes, pretensive joinder can be challenged by the opposing party through a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment.

Courts typically consider factors such as the legitimacy of the claims against the joined party, the timing of the joinder, and the motive behind including the party in the lawsuit.

The purpose of pretensive joinder is to manipulate the jurisdiction of a lawsuit, often to keep the case in a more favorable state court rather than being removed to federal court.

Yes, if a court determines that pretensive joinder has occurred, it may dismiss the joined party from the lawsuit and potentially impose sanctions on the party responsible for the joinder.

Defendants can argue that the joinder is legitimate and not intended to defeat diversity jurisdiction. They can present evidence to support their position and challenge the opposing party’s claims.

Pretensive joinder can be attempted in various types of lawsuits, but it is most commonly seen in cases involving personal injury, product liability, or mass torts.

To avoid allegations of pretensive joinder, plaintiffs should ensure that any parties they include in the lawsuit have a legitimate connection to the claims being made and are not solely added to manipulate jurisdiction.

While pretensive joinder is generally used by defendants to defeat diversity jurisdiction, plaintiffs may also attempt to use it strategically to keep a case in a more favorable state court. However, courts are vigilant in identifying and addressing such tactics.