Opinion ID: 866907
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Failure to Join Hartford

Text: An additional basis for concluding that the Appellants’ claim fails here rests on their failure to join Hartford CEBSCO as a defendant. Under Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit precedent, the Appellants must demonstrate that both the basis and nature of their claim are equitable. See Knudson, 534 U.S. at 213 (“[W]hether [a remedy] is legal or equitable depends on the basis for [the plaintiff’s] claim and the nature of the underlying remedies sought.” (alteration in original) (emphasis added) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Sereboff, 547 U.S. at 363. Although the Appellants’ basis for relief—a constructive trust—is equitable, the nature of the Appellants’ relief does not lie 6 The majority opinion implicitly overrules the third prong of the Bombardier test. I submit that this overruling is error as discussed more fully below. 33 Case: 11-40446 Document: 00512232754 Page: 34 Date Filed: 05/07/2013 No. 11-40446 in equity because Hartford CEBSCO—the entity that possesses and controls the annuity containing the funds at issue—was not joined as a defendant. Indeed, the Appellants’ remedy is legal in nature because it effectively seeks to impose personal liability on Larry Griffin, the Trust, and the Trustee “in an amount no less than $50,076.19,” regardless of the fact that none of these defendants has actual or constructive possession of the settlement funds. See Knudson, 534 U.S. at 214 (“The kind of restitution [sought], therefore, is not equitable—the imposition of a constructive trust or equitable lien on particular property—but legal—the imposition of personal liability for the benefits . . . conferred upon [the beneficiaries].” (emphasis added)); see also Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment § 55 cmt. h (2011) (“If the claimant cannot show an equitable entitlement to specific property in the hands of the defendant, the underlying basis of the remedy is lost.”). Therefore, the failure to join Hartford CEBSCO as a defendant precludes the Appellants from establishing the equitable nature of the relief they seek because they cannot demonstrate that any of the named defendants has possession of the settlement funds.