Lutz v. Anderson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that defendant and absent party would be represented by same attorney, suggesting their interests must be “aligned in all respects” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that Seneca I “stands for the unsurprising proposition that an absent sovereign may be a necessary party to a lawsuit that calls into question a real property interest of the sovereign” (emphasis added)
• “State (and federal) statutes are frequently challenged as unconstitutional without the state (or federal) government as a named party.”
• “Federal courts are extremely reluctant to grant motions to dismiss based on nonjoinder and, in general, dismissal will be ordered only when the defect cannot be cured and serious prejudice or inefficiency will result.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).