Eighth Circuit· 1/6/2010

Prempro Products Liability Litigation v. Wyeth

Citations

591 F.3d 613
65 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 747
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 239
2010 WL 21090

How courts have described this case

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

holding that, even if the doctrine were valid, “the plaintiffs’ alleged misjoinder [was] not so egregious as to constitute fraudulent misjoinder”
concluding that the joinder was not “so 20 egregious and grossly improper” as to constitute fraudulent misjoinder
noting that, when federal diversity jurisdiction depends on a question of joinder, \the proper procedure\ may be for parties to argue the joinder issue in state court
“Considering the uncertainty surrounding the propriety of the joinder of plaintiffs’ claims, the preferable course of action may have been for defendants to challenge the misjoinder in state court before it sought removal.”
noting the test for permissive joinder under Rule 20 is “not a rigid test and is meant to be read as broadly as possible whenever doing so is likely to promote judicial economy”
explaining fraudulent misjoinder and recognizing the Eighth Circuit has not adopted it

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Bright and Riley, Circuit Judges

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

45 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.