Legal Opinion · Concurrence
Flynn v. Hubbard
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided February 7, 1986No. Nos. 85-1397, 85-1398Published
1ConcurrenceCoffin, Circuit Judge
I believe the court misapplies Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) in finding that intervention should not be granted when the only defendant in the case has not appeared. The court holds that the rule can only be applied to cases involving parties actually arguing in court because the rule refers to “existing parties”. The phrase “existing parties” appears in the rule’s third requirement: a party who satisfies the rule’s first two requirements1 shall be permitted to intervene “unless the applicant’s interest is adequately represented by existing parties”. My brothers claim that this…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Trbovich v. United Mine WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Cascade Natural Gas Corp. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- The County of Fresno v. Cecil D. Andrus, National Land for People, Inc., Applicant for Intervention-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,083 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Flight Transportation Corporation, FTC Executive Air Charter, Inc., FTC Cayman, Ltd., and William Rubin, Greyhound Leasing & Financial Corporation, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Flight Transportation Corporation, FTC Executive Air Charter, Inc., FTC Cayman, Ltd., and William Rubin, Joyce RubinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.