507.040. Permissive joinder of parties — separate trials. — 1. All persons may join in one action as plaintiffs if they assert any right to relief jointly, severally, or in the alternative in respect of or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences and if any question of law or fact common to all of them will arise in the action. All persons may be joined in one action as defendants if there is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative, any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences and if any question of law or fact common to all of them will arise in the action. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, claims arising out of separate purchases of the same product or service, or separate incidents involving the same product or services shall not satisfy this section. A plaintiff or defendant need not be interested in obtaining or defending against all the relief demanded. Judgment may be given for one or more of the plaintiffs according to their respective rights to relief, and against one or more defendants according to their respective liabilities.
2. The general assembly hereby expressly adopts the holding of State ex rel. Johnson & Johnson v. Burlison, No. SC96704, as issued on February 13, 2019, as it relates to joinder and venue.
3. The court may make such orders as will prevent a party from being embarrassed, delayed, or put to expense by the inclusion of a party against whom he asserts no claim and who asserts no claim against him, and may order separate trials or make other orders to prevent delay or prejudice.
Notes of Decisions
State Ex Rel. McCubbin v. McMillian, 349 S.W.2d 453 (Mo. Ct. App. 1961).
· cites it 7× “,-Snyder had a right to join in his petition as many claims as he had against either American and Houston •subject to meeting the requirements of § 507.040, subsection (1) RSMo 1949, V.A.”
Quinn v. Buchanan, 298 S.W.2d 413 (Mo. 1957).
· cites it 6× “Plaintiffs say that in considering the rights of the discharged employees we have overlooked the provision of Section 507.040 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S., permitting joinder of plaintiffs if they assert any right to relief jointly or severally "in respect of or arising out of the same…”
Kendall v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 634 S.W.2d 176 (Mo. 1982).
· cites it 4× “A jury in the same or separate trial at the discretion of the trial court, § 507.040, RSMo 1969; rule 52.11(a); rule 66.”
State Ex Rel. Baker v. Goodman, 274 S.W.2d 293 (Mo. 1954).
· cites it 5× “In that case it was held that jurisdiction is acquired over non-resident defendants, even though no joint cause of action is stated, where the parties defendant are lawfully joined under the provisions of Section 507.”
State Ex Rel. Bitting v. Adolf, 704 S.W.2d 671 (Mo. 1986).
· cites it 4× “The presence of an additional claim against one defendant, in which others are not involved, should not stand in the way. Our holding is consistent with the general line of cases which treat of the interrelation of the venue statutes and the rules governing joinder of claims.”
Plaza Express Co. v. Galloway, 280 S.W.2d 17 (Mo. 1955).
· cites it 4× “The provisions of this section supplement and do not in any way limit the joinder of parties permitted in section 507.040." The quoted language is clear and unambiguous.”
State Ex Rel. Cozean v. Meyer, 449 S.W.2d 377 (Mo. Ct. App. 1969).
· cites it 4× “It was asserted in the motions: “That the attempted joinder of causes of action by the plaintiff against this defendant and against State Farm Mutual Insurance Company is an improper joinder and not a lawful, valid joinder, and violates Section 507.040 VAMS and Civil Rule…”
State Ex Rel. Turnbough v. Gaertner, 589 S.W.2d 290 (Mo. 1979).
· cites it 2× “05(a) 1 which superceded § 507.040 RSMo 1949 and governs permissive joinder of asserted claims for relief.”
Pizzo v. Pizzo, 295 S.W.2d 377 (Mo. 1956).
· cites it 2× “29 provides: "When a separate trial of any claim * * is ordered in any case and a jury trial thereof is had the separate judgment entered upon the verdict therein shall be deemed a final judgment for the purposes of appeal within the meaning of section 126 (now Section 512.”
State Ex Rel. Gulf Oil Corp. v. Weinstein, 379 S.W.2d 172 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964).
· cites it 3× “05, which is the same as Section 507.040, RSMo, V.A. M.S. It relates to the permissive joinder of parties, and it is as follows: “(a) Permissive Joinder.”
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 507.040(1): 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.