Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. Satellite Cable Serv. A trial court's findings of fact are to be reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. The purpose of intervention is to obviate delay and multiplicity of suits by creating an opportunity to persons directly interested in the subject matter to join in an action or proceeding already instituted. We agree with City s argument that it is not legally permissible to deny or condition an intervenor s right to enter an action.
City has an absolute right to intervene, and the trial court had no discretion to condition.
The fact that intervenor may have protected his right by pursuing another remedy is no reason for denying him the right to intervene. There appears to be no countervailing reason why the claim of City should not be adjudicated in this action. Mergen agrees the general rule allows an employer, in the context of workers compensation, the right to intervene in a subsequent tort claim against a third-party tortfeasor in order to recover those expenses incurred by the employer. See Miller s Mut. Rather, Mergen argues that the general rule does not apply because City s motion was untimely.