Home Artists Posts Import Register

Files

Comments

Anonymous

I'm going with D. Unless my brain has purged some rule after having just taken the bar this past week, third party claims are available for two big things: indemnification ("I might be liable, but this guy has to cover the bill") and contribution ("I might be liable, but so is guy and he owes his own share"). It's not there to say "I didn't do it at all, please sue this guy instead." Third party claims usually share a common nucleus of operative fact with the plaintiff's claim, and so fall within the court's supplemental jurisdiction, so A is out. You only need leave of the court if you're serving the third party complaint 14 days after your original answer, this one is in the answer and so is timely, so B is out. And C just starts a merits fight and doesn't do spit to dismiss this third party complaint outright.

Anonymous

Thank you for more accurately communicating what I was trying to say about D above.

Dr. Clerk

You're right. C goes too far into the merits to fall under 12(b)(6), whereas there is no valid claim for indemnification under 12(b)(6). I adhere to my earlier statement that any reasonable test-taker would skip this (and maybe come back or guess). Also, I googled this question and learned that it's #5 in a set of 10 civpro questions that Thomas must fight through.

Anonymous

I'm going to guess A: maybe this should be a counter-claim in State B rather than a 3rd party complaint