Civil Procedure Multistate Bar Practice Exam

What criteria must claims by multiple plaintiffs or against multiple defendants meet?

1. The claims must be related to different occurrences

2. They must raise at least one common question of law or fact

3. Each claim must involve different jurisdictions

4. The claims must be entirely unique from one another

The correct answer is: They must raise at least one common question of law or fact

The correct answer is that claims by multiple plaintiffs or against multiple defendants must raise at least one common question of law or fact. This requirement is rooted in the principles of joinder under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, specifically Rule 20, which allows for the permissive joinder of parties if the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence and if there is a common question of law or fact. Having a common question helps facilitate judicial efficiency and consistency in court decisions. For example, if multiple plaintiffs claim they were harmed by the same product, they likely will share questions regarding the product's safety and the manufacturer's liability. Allowing them to join their claims ensures that the same issues do not have to be litigated separately in different trials, conserving judicial resources and reducing the burden on the courts. The other options presented do not accurately capture the requirements for joinder under the pertinent rules. Claims related to different occurrences do not provide a basis for joining parties; instead, claims should be related to the same transaction or occurrence. Jurisdictional diversity is not a requirement for joining claims, but rather a criterion that determines the ability of a federal court to hear a case. Lastly, entirely unique claims would not satisfy the requirements for joinder since they would