Legal Opinion

Manning v. Manning

District Court, S.D. Mississippi

Decided January 12, 2015No. Civil Action No. 5:13-cv-238(DCB)(MTP)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DAVID BRAMLETTE, District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to join a required party (docket entry 54). Having carefully considered the motion and the plaintiffs’ response, the memoranda of the parties and the applicable law, and being fully advised in the premises, the Court finds as follows:

Rule 12(b)(7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a party may assert, by motion, the defense of “failure to join a party under Rule 19.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(7). Rule 19, “Required Joinder of Parties,”…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Indianapolis v. Chase Nat. BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. City of Indianapolis v. Chase National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. Republic of Philippines v. PimentelSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  5. Ferdinand Henry Schutten v. Shell Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. John T.B. Doe v. Salesians of Don Bosco, ET AL.District Court, M.D. Louisiana · 2026
  2. Jonika K. Nelson v. Allstate Vehicle & Property Insurance Co., et alDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2026
  3. The Estate of James Harris v. EichelbergerDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2021
  4. The Estate of Richard Jenkins v. VieringDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2022

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API