Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00351/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00351-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Diana Zavlunov, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Bursey & Associates, P.C., 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-0351-PHX-FJM

ORDER

Plaintiff Diana Zavlunov filed this action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices

Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p, contending that she has standing as a “consumer” as that term

is defined in the Act, id. § 1692a(3), to assert claims for violation of the Act. Defendant now

contends that Diana’s mother, Nelya Zavlunov, is actually the “consumer” or “debtor” and

that therefore she must be joined in the instant action pursuant to Rules 19 and 20, Fed. R.

Civ. P. The court has before it defendant’s motion to join a party plaintiff (doc. 18),

plaintiff’s response (doc. 22), and defendant’s reply (doc. 23). 

Under Rule 20, Fed. R. Civ. P., persons may join in an action as plaintiffs if “they

assert any right to relief jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out

of the same transaction [or] occurrence.” Nelya Zavlunov has asserted no right to join this

action. Only defendant requests her joinder. The defendant has no right to insist that

plaintiff join all parties who may satisfy Rule 20(a). 4 James Wm. Moore et al., Moore's

Case 2:09-cv-00351-FJM Document 25 Filed 12/03/09 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

Federal Practice § 20.02[2][b][i] (3d ed. 2009). Nor is joinder required under Rule 19, Fed.

R. Civ. P. Again, Nelya has claimed no interest in this action. Moreover, Nelya and Diana’s

potential claims are distinct and joinder of Nelya is not necessary in order to accord complete

relief among existing parties. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 19(a). While it appears that plaintiff has

no standing as a “consumer” to assert many of the claims raised in the complaint, those

claims should be either voluntarily dismissed by plaintiff or eliminated with a motion to

dismiss. 

IT IS ORDERED DENYING defendant’s motion for joinder of a party plaintiff

(doc. 18). 

DATED this 2nd day of December, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-00351-FJM Document 25 Filed 12/03/09 Page 2 of 2