Which of the following is a requirement for proper parties in a lawsuit?

The requirement that claims must arise from the same transaction or occurrence is rooted in the principles of joinder in civil procedure. This principle allows multiple claims to be brought together in a single lawsuit if they are sufficiently related—specifically, if they stem from the same facts or events. This serves the interests of judicial economy and convenience by allowing the court to resolve interconnected issues in one proceeding rather than in separate lawsuits.

The rationale for this requirement is that it prevents the duplication of trials and promotes the consistent resolution of similar issues. It also helps to avoid inconsistent judgments and allows all parties affected by the same set of facts to be heard in the same forum.

Other options do not accurately represent the requirements for proper parties in a lawsuit. Regarding the idea that all parties must be from the same state, this is not a requirement for all cases. Rather, it touches on issues related to diversity jurisdiction, which depends on the nature of the claim and the parties involved, rather than a blanket requirement.

The option regarding no multiple plaintiffs ignores the fact that multiple plaintiffs can indeed join in a lawsuit, especially under rules allowing for permissive joinder as long as their claims are related. Furthermore, the statement that all claims must involve the same legal question is overly restrictive