Toberman v. Copas

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff sues defendant who then impleads third-party defendants.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A defendant may not use FRCP 14 to implead a third-party defendant on the basis that third-party defendant is directly or wholly liable to the plaintiff.

Facts.

Plaintiffs sued several Defendants for injuries they sustained on the Pennsylvania turnpike. Defendant Menendez filed a third-party suit against Swarthout and St. Johnsbury Trucking Company. The third-party defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a motion for a more definitive statement pursuant to FRCP 12 in the alternative. The third-party defendants argued the court did not have jurisdiction over the third-party claims.

Issue.

May a defendant implead a third-party defendant through FRCP 14 on the basis that the third-party defendant is directly or wholly liable to the plaintiff?

Held.

No, a defendant may not implead a third-party defendant through FRCP 14 on the basis that the third-party defendant is directly or wholly liable to the plaintiff. Defendant Menendez will be given a chance to amend the impleader complaint to conform with FRCP 14. If he fails to do so the motion to dismiss the third-party complaint will be granted.

Discussion.

1. FRCP 14 enables third-party complaints to be served by a defendant or third-party upon a nonparty who may be liable to the third-party plaintiff (original defendant) for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against the third-party plaintiff (original defendant).
2. FRCP 14promotes judicial economy because it allows the defendant to bring to judgement the third-party defendant that may be liable right away instead of having to wait for the action against him to proceed to completion and then bring the claim against the third-party defendant later on.
3. Before 1948 FRCP 14 allowed a defendant to implead a party based on a “not me defense”—that the third-party plaintiff was actually wholly liable for the plaintiff’s injury. But this is no longer allowed.
4. FRCP 14 now only allows a defendant to implead a third-party defendant based on derivative liability, like indemnification or contribution.
5. The proper way for a defendant to contest their liability is in their answer.
6. Here, Defendant Menendez is attempting to implead the third-party defendants Swarthout and St. Johnsbury Trucking Company based on the premise that they are wholly liable to the plaintiff.
7. Defendant Menendez will be given a chance to amend his third-party complaint to conform with FRCP 14. If he fails to do so the motion to dismiss the third-party complaint will be granted.