Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 19 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Hood Ex Rel. Mississippi v. City of Memphis, Tenn..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hood Ex Rel. Mississippi v. City of Memphis, Tenn. Anchor | green | “while the party advocating joinder has the initial burden of demonstrating that a missing party is necessary, after 'an initial appraisal of the facts indicates that a possibly necessary party is absent, the burden of disputing this initial appraisal falls on the party who oppos…” | 10 |
| 2 | Hood Ex Rel. Mississippi v. City of Memphis, Tenn. | green | “an initial appraisal of the facts indicates that a possibly necessary party is absent, the burden of disputing this initial appraisal falls on the party who opposes joinder.” | 5 |
| 3 | Hs Resources, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Jim R. Wingate, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant | green | “rule 19 provides for the joinder of all parties whose presence in a lawsuit is required for the fair and complete resolution of the dispute at issue.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.