Which statement best describes the required elements for common questions of law or fact among multiple claims?

The statement that best describes the required elements for common questions of law or fact among multiple claims is that there must be clear evidence of their connection. In civil procedure, the requirement for commonality among claims often revolves around whether these claims share essential facts or legal issues that link them in a meaningful way. This connection allows for judicial efficiency and consistency in rulings, as having common questions can facilitate consolidated proceedings and avoid duplicative litigation.

Connecting questions of law or fact may arise from the same transaction or occurrence or similar actions involved in different claims. The need for clarity in establishing such connections ensures that the court understands why multiple claims warrant consideration together, as opposed to being treated as isolated disputes. This reflects the goal of promoting judicial economy and providing comprehensive resolutions to related legal disputes in a single forum whenever appropriate.

The other options fail to capture the essence of the commonality requirement. For instance, unrelated claims would not satisfy the common questions criterion, and claims involving different state laws can still present common legal issues that can be decided in a federal forum under diversity jurisdiction or other applicable doctrines. Furthermore, limiting commonality to a single legal issue neglects the potential for multiple overlapping issues of facts or law, which can also support the rationale for combining claims.