Joinder of a Pension Plan

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento Family Law Facilitator’s Office JOINDER OF A PENSION PLAN Purpose of Packet This packet is used when a party to a dissolution or legal separation case has a retirement plan through their employer and the opposing party wishes to join the plan into the case. Joining the plan provides notice that a dissolution or legal separation has been filed and also ensures that the non-employee spouse’s interest is not distributed before its proper division is decided by the court. Each eligible benefit plan must be joined separately to the case. Do I Need to Join the Benefit Plan? Joinder applies to both private and public employee benefit plans. However, there are distinctions between certain plans that must be joined and others for which joinder is not necessary or another process is used instead. Before you begin, you are strongly encouraged to speak to an attorney about property and retirement interests you may have. The following are basic guidelines. Joinder is required for some state and county retirement plans. For example, the State Teachers Retirement System (STRS) must be joined, while it is not necessary for Public Employees Retirement Plan (PERS). Please consult an attorney for specific information. For Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) plans, under federal law, the court’s order is enforceable against the plan so long as it satisfies federal Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) requirements. Should you have questions, please obtain the assistance of an attorney. The Family Law Facilitator’s Office in the Self-Help Center has a referral list of attorneys in this area of practice. Getting Started The following is a list of the forms you will need. You will need a set of forms for each employee benefit plan you would like to join. Ø Summons (Joinder), form FL-375 Ø Request for Joinder of Employee Benefit Plan and Order, form FL-372 Ø Pleading on Joinder – Employee Benefit Plan, form FL-370 Page 1 of 7 6/21/2016 Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento Family Law Facilitator’s Office Other forms needed for this process are: Ø Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt, form FL-117 Ø Notice of Appearance and Response of Employee Benefit Plan, form FL-374 Ø Two (2) Proof of Service By Mail, form FL-335 Completing the Summons (Joinder), form FL-375 The Section at the top of the form is called the “caption” and must be completed before forms can be filed. It is helpful if you use middle initials or full middle name and suffix, e.g., Jr., II, or III when completing the forms. In the top left box of the caption, print your full name, full mailing address, telephone number with area code and email address. In the space where it says "ATTORNEY FOR" print “Self.” This means that you are acting as your own attorney in this case. In the second box down on the left side of the caption, the Court’s name and address may already appear. If not, please print the following information starting where it says “Superior Court of California, County of”: Sacramento 3341 Power Inn Road, Room 100 Sacramento, California 95826 Family Relations Courthouse In the third box down on the left side of the caption, print the full name of the party that opened/filed the case next to the word “Petitioner” and the name of the other party (or person that was originally served) next to “Respondent.” In the fourth box down on the left side of the caption, print the name of the benefit plan next to “Claimant.” In the second box down on the right side of the caption, print the case number. Item 1: Leave this section blank. It does not apply to this type of filing. Item 2: Check the box marked, “To The Claimant Employee Benefit Plan.” In the blank space below, print the name of the employee benefit plan. Do not fill in the “Dated” or “Clerk, By” sections beneath item 2. This must be left blank for the court clerk to complete. Item 3: Check box 3c, “On behalf of.” In the area marked “Under”, check the box for “FC 2062 (Employee Benefit Plan)”. Leave the back side of the Summons blank. Your process server must fill in the form once service has been completed. Page 2 of 7 6/21/2016 Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento Family Law Facilitator’s Office Completing the Request for Joinder of Employee Benefit Plan and Order, form FL-372 Complete the caption section as you did for the previous form. Refer to the instructions above. Item 1: Fill in the name of the employee benefit plan. Remember, if there is more than one plan involved, you must complete the joinder process for each eligible plan. Fill in the date that you signed the form. Place your signature on the line to the right of the date. Below the signature line, check the box indicating whether you are the Petitioner or Respondent to the case. Below the boxes, print your name. Leave the remainder of the form blank. The Clerk of Court will complete the form at the time you file it. Completing the Pleading on Joinder – Employee Benefit Plan, form FL-370 Complete the caption section as you did for the previous form. Refer to the instructions above. Item 1: Fill in the name of the employee covered under the benefit plan. Fill in the name of his/her employer. If you know the name of the labor union involved, check box c. and fill in the name of the union. If you know the employee’s identification number, check box d. and fill in the information. If you have other information to help identify the plan or employee involved, add this information in the space marked “Other”. Item 2: If the Petitioner is represented by an attorney, check box a. and fill in the attorney’s name, address and phone number. If the Petitioner is not represented, check box b. and fill in the requested information. Item 3: If the Respondent is represented by an attorney, check box a. and fill in the attorney’s name, address and phone number. If the Respondent is not represented, fill in the requested information under section b. Back side: Across the top of the page, complete the short caption by filling in the Petitioner and Respondent’s names on the left and the case number to the right. Item 4: Check the Petition for Dissolution/Legal Separation that was filed in your case. This is the original paperwork that began your legal proceeding. Fill in the Date of Marriage and Date of Separation that was listed in the Petition. Now, check the Response that was filed in the case. If the Response lists the same Date of Marriage and Date of Separation, check the box before “and response states”. If no response has been filed, leave this box unchecked. Page 3 of 7 6/21/2016 Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento Family Law Facilitator’s Office Item 5: If the Response states different information for Date of Marriage and Date of Separation, check the box and fill in the information as listed on the Response. If no Response has been filed, or if it lists the same dates as on the Petition, leave this item blank. Item 6: If a judgment has not yet been entered in your case, check box a. If a judgment has already been entered, check box b. and enter the date of the judgment. If the judgment disposes of each spouse’s interest in the employee benefit plan, check box (1). If the judgment did not dispose of each spouse’s interest in the employee benefit plan, check box (2). Item 7: Read each box carefully. Check any or all the boxes that apply to the relief you are seeking from the court. You may also check box e. for other relief you are requesting, if not contained in the previous selections. Write in the specific relief in the space below box e. Item 7f requests the court to grant other orders as appropriate and is automatically indicated on the form. Date, sign and print your name on the bottom of the form. Check the box below your signature to indicate if you are the Petitioner or Respondent. Filing Your Joinder 1. Make Copies Once you have completed the above forms, make three copies of each of the documents. Group each form together with the original on top (i.e. the Summons with its copies, the Request for Joinder with its copies, etc.). 2. File Original plus copies Obtain a service ticket number from Reception. Bring the original plus copies to the filing unit in Room 100. The clerk will endorse the documents. The clerk will return the original plus the three copies of your Summons. The original Summons will have the Sacramento Superior Court seal affixed in red ink and an original signature of the court clerk. The clerk will retain the original of the remaining two documents, and return the copies to you. Completing the Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt, form FL-117 Complete the caption section as you did for the previous forms. Refer to the instructions above. Below the caption box, fill in the name of the employee benefit plan after the words “To (name of individual being served).” You must have the forms served upon your spouse and the Employee Benefit plan. Have another adult, who is not a party to the case serve the papers for you.
Recommended publications
  • Service of Process. What Is It?

    Service of Process. What Is It?

    Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento Self-Help Services Service of Process. What is it? “Service” is the legal act of giving papers to the other party. Types of Service. Service can be done in the following ways: o Handing papers to the other party personally. This is called “personal service.” o Sending papers by mail, by express mail, or overnight delivery. This is called “service by mail.” o Fax or electronically (such as e-mail.) The person receiving the documents must agree to these methods. o Publication (with Court approval). Certain papers require personal service. Be sure to check the rules applicable to the type of papers you are serving for the requirements. Who can serve the papers? You cannot serve the papers. Any person over the age of 18, who is not involved with the case, must serve the papers. The person serving the papers must fill out a “Proof of Service” which describes the documents they gave or sent to the other party or parties, and the date the documents were served. You must file the completed “Proof of Service” with the court. The Sheriff Department’s Civil Bureau is available to personally serve papers. They charge a fee for this service. This fee may be waived if you have an active fee waiver for the case. They can only serve someone in Sacramento County. Contact the Sacramento Sheriff’s Civil Bureau, 3341 Power Inn Rd, Rm. 313, Sacramento, CA 95826. The phone number is (916) 875-2665. The public counter hours are Monday through Friday from 9:00 am – 3:00 pm Private companies will serve also personally serve papers.
  • The Shadow Rules of Joinder

    The Shadow Rules of Joinder

    Brooklyn Law School BrooklynWorks Faculty Scholarship 2012 The hS adow Rules of Joinder Robin Effron Brooklyn Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/faculty Part of the Other Law Commons Recommended Citation 100 Geo. L. J. 759 (2011-2012) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of BrooklynWorks. The Shadow Rules of Joinder ROBIN J. EFFRON* The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide litigants with procedural devices for joining claims and parties. Several of these rules demand that the claims or parties share a baseline of commonality, either in the form of the same "transactionor occurrence" or a "common question of law or fact." Both phrases have proved to be notoriously tricky in application.Commentators from the academy and the judiciary have attributed these difficulties to the context- specific and discretionary nature of the rules. This Article challenges that wisdom by suggesting that the doctrinal confu- sion can be attributed to deeper theoretical divisions in the judiciary, particu- larly with regardto the role of the ontological categories of "fact" and "law." These theoretical divisions have led lower courtjudges to craft shadow rules of joinder "Redescription" is the rule by which judges utilize a perceived law-fact distinction to characterizea set of facts as falling inside or outside a definition of commonality. "Impliedpredominance" is the rule in which judges have taken the Rule 23(b)(3) class action standard that common questions predominate over individual issues and applied it to other rules of joinder that do not have this express requirement.
  • Construction Arbitration: Unique Joinder and Consolidation Challenges

    Construction Arbitration: Unique Joinder and Consolidation Challenges

    ® JUNE 2020 | VOLUME 74 | NUMBER 3 © 2020, American Arbitration Association Construction Arbitration: Unique Joinder and Consolidation Challenges Steven Champlin∗ Tiana Towns† Introduction It is well known that arbitration as a means of deciding disputes is used widely in the construction industry to avoid litigation costs and delays and for other reasons. To a great extent, the American Arbitration Association (AAA) has provided the preferred forum and rules. Yet, there are lawyers and their clients who question use of arbitration to resolve construction disputes. One of the reasons often advanced relates to the potential inability in some circumstances to join, that is add, some parties to a proceeding or consolidate related, but separate, arbitrations, with the consequence that multiple proceedings, increased expense, and inconsistent results can occur. It is important for those in the construction industry to understand what the joinder and consolidation challenges actually are and how they can be mitigated. I. Reasons Construction Disputes May Give Rise to Joinder and Consolidation Issues Construction disputes often require evaluation of which parties should be joined in a proceeding or whether a related arbitration should be consoli- dated with a proceeding for a number of reasons unique to the construction setting, which are discussed below. ∗After retiring from Dorsey & Whitney LLP, an international law firm, where he served as head of the firm’s construction and design group for over 20 years, Steven Champlin has devoted most of his professional activities to serving as an arbitrator. He is a member of the AAA National Roster of Arbitrators, Large, Complex Cases Panel, CPR’s National Panel of Distinguished Construction Neutrals, and the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
  • Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview

    Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview

    Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview MARCELLUS MCRAE AND ROXANNA IRAN, GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP WITH HOLLY B. BIONDO AND ELIZABETH RICHARDSON-ROYER, WITH PRACTICAL LAW LITIGATION A Practice Note explaining the initial steps of a For more information on commencing a lawsuit in federal court, including initial considerations and drafting the case initiating civil lawsuit in US district courts and the major documents, see Practice Notes, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: procedural and practical considerations counsel Initial Considerations (http://us.practicallaw.com/3-504-0061) and Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Drafting the Complaint (http:// face during a lawsuit's early stages. Specifically, us.practicallaw.com/5-506-8600); see also Standard Document, this Note explains how to begin a lawsuit, Complaint (Federal) (http://us.practicallaw.com/9-507-9951). respond to a complaint, prepare to defend a The plaintiff must include with the complaint: lawsuit and comply with discovery obligations The $400 filing fee. early in the litigation. Two copies of a corporate disclosure statement, if required (FRCP 7.1). A civil cover sheet, if required by the court's local rules. This Note explains the initial steps of a civil lawsuit in US district For more information on filing procedures in federal court, see courts (the trial courts of the federal court system) and the major Practice Note, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Filing and Serving the procedural and practical considerations counsel face during a Complaint (http://us.practicallaw.com/9-506-3484). lawsuit's early stages. It covers the steps from filing a complaint through the initial disclosures litigants must make in connection with SERVICE OF PROCESS discovery.
  • Article 49. Pleadings and Joinder. § 15A-921. Pleadings in Criminal Cases. Subject to the Provisions of This Article, the Fo

    Article 49. Pleadings and Joinder. § 15A-921. Pleadings in Criminal Cases. Subject to the Provisions of This Article, the Fo

    Article 49. Pleadings and Joinder. § 15A-921. Pleadings in criminal cases. Subject to the provisions of this Article, the following may serve as pleadings of the State in criminal cases: (1) Citation. (2) Criminal summons. (3) Warrant for arrest. (4) Magistrate's order pursuant to G.S. 15A-511 after arrest without warrant. (5) Statement of charges. (6) Information. (7) Indictment. (1973, c. 1286, s. 1; 1975, c. 166, s. 18.) § 15A-922. Use of pleadings in misdemeanor cases generally. (a) Process as Pleadings. – The citation, criminal summons, warrant for arrest, or magistrate's order serves as the pleading of the State for a misdemeanor prosecuted in the district court, unless the prosecutor files a statement of charges, or there is objection to trial on a citation. When a statement of charges is filed it supersedes all previous pleadings of the State and constitutes the pleading of the State. (b) Statement of Charges. (1) A statement of charges is a criminal pleading which charges a misdemeanor. It must be signed by the prosecutor who files it. (2) Upon appropriate motion, a defendant is entitled to a period of at least three working days for the preparation of his defense after a statement of charges is filed, or the time the defendant is first notified of the statement of charges, whichever is later, unless the judge finds that the statement of charges makes no material change in the pleadings and that no additional time is necessary. (3) If the judge rules that the pleadings charging a misdemeanor are insufficient and a prosecutor is permitted to file a statement of charges pursuant to subsection (e), the order of the judge must allow the prosecutor three working days, unless the judge determines that a longer period is justified, in which to file the statement of charges, and must provide that the charges will be dismissed if the statement of charges is not filed within the period allowed.
  • Service of Civil Summons and Subpoenas Upon Members of The

    Service of Civil Summons and Subpoenas Upon Members of The

    GENERAL ORDER Title Service of Subpoenas and Civil Lawsuits Upon Members of the Department Topic Series Number PCA 701 04 Effective Date November 10, 2011 Replaces: DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA General Order 701.04 (Service of Subpoenas and Civil Lawsuits Upon Members of the Department) Effective Date: June 9, 2011 I. Background Page 1 II. Policy Page 2 III Definitions Page 2 IV. Regulations Page 4 V. Procedures Page 7 V.A Civil and Criminal Subpoenas Page 7 V.B Summonses and Complaints for Civil Lawsuits Page 13 V.C Substitute Service of Subpoenas and Civil Lawsuits Page 15 V.D Obtaining Legal Counsel Page 17 VI. Cross References Page 18 VII. Attachments Page 18 I. BACKGROUND On June 3, 2011, Chapter 20 of Title 6A “Police Personnel” District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR), was amended pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 5- 105.09 (Service of Process). Under the amendments, non-government attorneys and unrepresented parties may request the Court Liaison Division (CLD) assist in transmitting via electronic mail: A. Notifications of Subpoenas generated through the Computer Assisted Notification System (CANS), B. Subpoenas for civil or criminal cases, and C. Summonses and complaints for civil lawsuits to members arising out of their official duties for the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). Non-government attorneys and unrepresented parties may also choose to have a process server personally serve members with subpoenas or summonses and complaints. In lieu of personal service, members may designate the Bureau Head of the bureau to which they are assigned to accept service of subpoenas or summonses and complaints on their behalf.
  • Responding to a Complaint: Washington, Practical Law State Q&A W-000-4121

    Responding to a Complaint: Washington, Practical Law State Q&A W-000-4121

    Responding to a Complaint: Washington, Practical Law State Q&A w-000-4121 Responding to a Complaint: Washington by Barbara J. Duffy, Lane Powell PC, with Practical Law Litigation Law stated as of 10 Jun 2019 • United States, Washington A Q&A guide to responding to a complaint in a trial court of general jurisdiction in Washington. This Q&A addresses the time to respond, extending the time to respond, pre-answer motions, answers, replies to the answer, counterclaims, crossclaims, third-party claims (also known as impleader), and defensive interpleader. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Responding to a Complaint: State Q&A Tool). Overview of Responding to a State Complaint 1. When must a defendant respond to the complaint? In Washington, a defendant must respond to a complaint within 20 days after being served with the summons and complaint (Wash. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 4(a)(2) and 12(a)(1)). If process is served by publication, a defendant must respond within 60 days from the date of first publication of the summons (RCW 4.28.110 and Wash. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(a)(2)). If a plaintiff serves a defendant outside of Washington, the defendant has 60 days to respond to the complaint (RCW 4.28.180 and Wash. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(a)(3)). 2. How, if at all, can one obtain an extension of time to respond (for example, by stipulation, so-ordered stipulation, ex parte motion, motion on notice)? Counsel should check the local court's website for additional information regarding extending time to respond to a complaint.
  • Supreme Court of Missouri's Decision in SC98227

    Supreme Court of Missouri's Decision in SC98227

    SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc STATE OF MISSOURI ex rel. ) Opinion issued July 28, 2020 WOODCO, INC., ) ) Relator, ) ) v. ) No. SC98227 ) THE HONORABLE JENNIFER ) PHILLIPS, ) ) Respondent. ) ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN PROHIBITION Woodco Inc. seeks a writ of prohibition prohibiting the circuit court from ordering certain defendants to be joined as “necessary” parties. Because Rule 52.04(a) does not mandate the added defendants be joined, the circuit court’s action in sustaining motions seeking their joinder constituted an abuse of discretion, and the circuit court did not have the authority to require joinder. This Court makes permanent its preliminary writ of prohibition. Background This case concerns contracts among multip le parties involved in the design and construction of the Gardens at Jackson Creek (“Project”), an independent senior living facility. The owner of the Project contracted with Williams Spurgeon Kuhl & Freshnock Architects (“architect”). The architect entered into a contract with Bob D. Campbell & Co. (“structural engineer”). The owner of the Project also entered into a contract with Woodco to serve as the general contractor for construction of the Project. As the general contractor, Woodco then entered into various contracts, including one with Haren & Laughlin Construction Co. Inc. (“construction company”) to provide quality control for the Project and another with RCC Framing, LLC (“frame r ”) to perform framing and to install windows, which were provided by Associated Materials LLC d/b/a Alside Supply Center (“supplier”). Woodco also contracted with BSP Masonry LLC (“masonry company”) to perform brick masonry work. After deficiencies in the construction of the Project emerged, Woodco and the owner of the Project entered into a settlement agreement in which the owner of the Project assigned to Woodco any and all rights, claims, and interest against third parties arising from or relating to the Project’s defects.
  • Application of Compulsory Joinder, Intervention, Impleader, and Attachment to the Letter of Credit Litigation

    Application of Compulsory Joinder, Intervention, Impleader, and Attachment to the Letter of Credit Litigation

    Fordham Law Review Volume 52 Issue 5 Article 10 1984 Application of Compulsory Joinder, Intervention, Impleader, and Attachment to the Letter of Credit Litigation David C. Howard Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation David C. Howard, Application of Compulsory Joinder, Intervention, Impleader, and Attachment to the Letter of Credit Litigation, 52 Fordham L. Rev. 957 (1984). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol52/iss5/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE APPLICATION OF COMPULSORY JOINDER, INTERVENTION, IMPLEADER AND ATTACHMENT TO LETTER OF CREDIT LITIGATION INTRODUCTION A letter of credit' is a device by which a bank or other issuer,2 at the request of its customer, engages 3 that it will honor drafts or other demands for payment if presented in compliance with specified condi- tions.4 The essential function of the letter of credit is to substitute the 1. For a general definition of a letter of credit, see Bank of Newport v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 34 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (Callaghan) 650, 655 (8th Cir. 1982); East Girard Say. Ass'n v. Citizens Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 593 F.2d 598, 601-02 (5th Cir. 1979) (quoting 2 Tex.
  • Federal Jurisdiction and Due Process in the Era of the Nationwide Class Action

    Federal Jurisdiction and Due Process in the Era of the Nationwide Class Action

    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 2008 Federal Jurisdiction and Due Process in the Era of the Nationwide Class Action Tobias Barrington Wolff University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Civil Procedure Commons, Courts Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Legislation Commons, Litigation Commons, and the Public Law and Legal Theory Commons Repository Citation Wolff, Tobias Barrington, "Federal Jurisdiction and Due Process in the Era of the Nationwide Class Action" (2008). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1623. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1623 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FEDERALJURISDICTION AND DUE PROCESS IN THE ERA OF THE NATIONWIDE CLASS ACTION TOBIAS BARRINGTON WOLFFt INTRO DUCTIO N .................................................................................... 2035 I. INTERDICTING STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS: TARGETED GRANTS OFJURISDICTION AND THE ANTISUIT INJUNCTION ......... 2046 A. The Anti-Injunction Act in an Era of Nationwide Complex Litigation ............................................................. 2047 B. TargetedJurisdiction
  • Rule 19. Required Joinder of Parties (A) PERSONS REQUIRED to BE JOINED IF FEASIBLE

    Rule 19. Required Joinder of Parties (A) PERSONS REQUIRED to BE JOINED IF FEASIBLE

    Rule 19. Required Joinder of Parties (a) PERSONS REQUIRED TO BE JOINED IF FEASIBLE. (1) Required Party. A person who is subject to service of process and whose joinder will not deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction must be joined as a party if: (A) in that person's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties; or (B) that person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that disposing of the action in the person's absence may: (i) as a practical matter impair or impede the person's ability to protect the interest; or (ii) leave an existing party subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations because of the interest. (2) Joinder by Court Order. If a person has not been joined as required, the court must order that the person be made a party. A person who refuses to join as a plaintiff may be made either a defendant or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff. (3) Service of Process. Service of process under this rule must be accomplished in the manner and within the time limits prescribed by Rule 4. (b) WHEN JOINDER IS NOT FEASIBLE. If a person who is required to be joined if feasible cannot be joined, the court must determine whether, in equity and good conscience, the action should proceed among the existing parties or should be dismissed. The factors for the court to consider include: (1) the extent to which a judgment rendered in the person's absence might prejudice that person or the existing parties; (2) the extent to which any prejudice could be lessened or avoided by: (A) protective provisions in the judgment; (B) shaping the relief; or (C) other measures; (3) whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence would be adequate; and (4) whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the action were dismissed for nonjoinder.
  • Chapter 6 – Civil Case Procedures

    Chapter 6 – Civil Case Procedures

    GENERAL DISTRICT COURT MANUAL CIVIL CASE PROCEDURES Page 6-1 Chapter 6 – Civil Case Procedures Introduction Civil cases are brought to enforce, redress, or protect the private rights of an individual, organization or government entity. The remedies available in a civil action include the recovery of money damages and the issuance of a court order requiring a party to the suit to complete an agreement or to refrain from some activity. The party who initiates the suit is the “plaintiff,” and the party against whom the suit is brought is the “defendant.” In civil cases, the plaintiff must prove his case by “a preponderance of the evidence.” Any person who is a plaintiff in a civil action in a court of the Commonwealth and a resident of the Commonwealth or a defendant in a civil action in a court of the Commonwealth, and who is on account of his poverty unable to pay fees or costs, may be allowed by the court to sue or defendant a suit therein without paying fees and costs. The person may file the DC-409, PETITION FOR PROCEEDING IN CIVIL CASE WITHOUT PAYMENT OF FEES OR COSTS . In determining a person’s ability to pay fees or costs on account of his/her poverty, the court shall consider whether such person is current recipient of a state and federally funded public assistance program for the indigent or is represented by legal aid society, including an attorney appearing as counsel, pro bono or assigned or referred by legal aid society. If so, such person shall be presumed unable to pay such fees and costs.