Opinion ID: 1239543
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Parties Plaintiff.

Text: One of the grounds relied upon by the trial court for dismissing Fox's amended motion for judgment was the nonjoinder of parties plaintiff. All defendants asserted this defense. Fox originally alleged under oath in a motion for judgment filed in a prior nonsuited action that he was the principal planner and promoter of the concert and that his associates and partners in the promotion of this event included Theodore Powell, John H. Martin and Alan Drewry. In the present action, however, Fox alleges only that he was the principal planner and promoter and makes no reference to associates or partners. The defendants contend that because Fox previously alleged under oath that he had partners, he could not subsequently maintain that he had no partners and, therefore, the trial court properly dismissed this action for failure of Fox's partners to join in as plaintiffs. We do not agree. In his amended motion for judgment, Fox does not maintain that he had no partners. He alleges, without more, that he was the principal planner and promoter of the 'Mardi Gras' concert. This allegation is not necessarily inconsistent with the allegations contained in the prior motion for judgment. Whether the court should have dismissed the action based on nonjoinder of parties plaintiff is answered by Code | 8.01-5(A) and Rule 3:9A. Code | 8.01-5(A) provides as follows: No action or suit shall abate or be defeated by the nonjoinder or misjoinder of parties, plaintiff or defendant, but whenever such nonjoinder or misjoinder shall be made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, new parties may be added and parties misjoined may be dropped by order of the court at any time as the ends of justice may require. Rule 3:9A provides in pertinent part as follows: (a) Persons to Be Joined if Feasible. -- A person who is subject to service of process may be joined as a party in the action . . . . If he should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, he may be made a defendant, or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff. (b) Method of Joinder. -- A motion to join an additional party shall, subject to the provisions of Rule 1:9, be filed with the clerk within twenty-one days after service of the motion for judgment and shall be served on the party sought to be joined who shall thereafter be subject to all provisions of these Rules, except the provisions requiring payment of writ tax and clerk's fees. Clearly, the alleged nonjoinder of parties plaintiff was not a proper ground for dismissing this action. Indeed, if the defendants had desired to pursue the matter, they and the trial court should have followed the procedures set forth in the statute and the rule for determining whether the purported partners were necessary parties. [3]