United States v. San Juan Bay Marina

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that an absentee that was aware of a lawsuit and chose not to intervene was “apparently of the view that its interests either were not at stake or were aligned with those of the [plaintiff]”
• affirming district court’s finding that a party was not nec- essary under Federal Rule 19 where the party “deci[ded] to forgo intervention”
• reviewing a summary-judgment ruling driven in part by a Rule-19(b) analysis
• a party is necessary under Rule 19 (a)(1)(B)(i) only if it claims a “legally protected interest” relating to the subject matter of the action
• “Since its decision to forgo intervention indicates that the Commonwealth does not deem its own interests substantially threatened by the litigation, the court should not second-guess this determination, at least absent special circumstances.”
• “Since its decision to forgo intervention indicates that the Commonwealth does not deem its own interests substantially threatened by the litigation, the court should not second-guess this determination, at least absent special circumstances.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).