Ariz. R. Civ. P. 19
State Bar Committee Note
1966 Amendment to Rule 19
The present rule, with its judicial gloss in terms of indispensable, necessary, and proper parties, has proved confusing and difficult to apply. The revision seeks to substitute practical procedures to deal with problems where otherwise desirable joinder is difficult. At the same time, it retains the basic principle that parties must be joined where this is required by "equity and good conscience." Shields v. Barrow, 58 U.S. 130, 17 How. 130, 15 L. Ed. 158 (1854); Bolin v. Superior Ct., 85 Ariz. 131, 333 P.2d 295 (1958); Smith v. Rabb, 95 Ariz. 49, 386 P.2d 649 (1963); State of Washington v. United States, 87 F.2d 421 (9th Cir. 1936).
The description is not at variance with the settled authorities holding that a tortfeasor with the usual "joint-and-several" liability is merely a permissive party to an action against another with like liability. Joinder of these tortfeasors continues to be regulated by Rule; compare Rule on third-party practice.
If a person as described in subdivision (a)(1)-(2) is amenable to service of process and his joinder would not deprive the court of jurisdiction in the sense of competence over the action, he should be joined as a party; and if he has not been joined, the court should order him to be brought into the action. If a party joined has a valid objection to the venue and chooses to assert it, he will be dismissed from the action.
Under subdivision (b), when a person as described in subdivision (a)(1)-(2) cannot be made a party, the court is to determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties already before it, or should be dismissed because the absent party is indispensable.
Subdivision (c) continues the requirement that a pleading asserting a claim for relief state the names of persons described in subdivision (c) who are not joined as parties and the reasons for their non-joinder.
The official comment of the federal advisory committee on civil rules on the change in Federal Rule 19 is comprehensive and should be consulted.