Persons having claims against the plaintiff may be joined as defendants and required to interplead when their claims are such that the plaintiff is or may be exposed to double or multiple liability. It is not ground for objection to the joinder that the claims of the several claimants or the titles on which their claims depend do not have a common origin or are not identical but are adverse to and independent of one another, or that the plaintiff avers that the plaintiff is not liable in whole or in part to any or all of the claimants. A defendant exposed to similar liability may obtain such interpleader by way of cross- claim or counterclaim. The provisions of this rule supplement and do not in any way limit the joinder of parties permitted in Rule 20.
Rule 22.Interpleader.
Last amended July 15, 1994 · Last verified July 6, 2026
In one sentenceRule 22 lets a party facing competing claims to the same money or property join every claimant as a defendant and force them to fight it out among themselves, even if the claims don't share a common origin or the party denies owing anything to anyone.
Full Text of Rule 22
Amendment History
(Adopted by SCO 5 October 9, 1959; amended by SCO 1153 effective July 15, 1994)
Plain-English Summary
Someone exposed to double or multiple liability because several people are each claiming against it may join all those claimants as defendants and require them to interplead — that is, litigate the competing claims among themselves. It doesn't matter that the claims, or the titles behind them, share no common origin, aren't identical, or are even adverse to and independent of one another, and it doesn't matter that the party bringing the interpleader claims it isn't liable to any of the claimants at all. A defendant facing the same kind of exposure can raise interpleader by cross-claim or counterclaim instead. Rule 22 supplements, and doesn't limit, the joinder already allowed under Rule 20.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is interpleader used for?
It lets someone facing competing claims to the same fund or property — like an insurer or a stakeholder holding disputed funds — join every claimant as a defendant and have the competing claims resolved in one case.
Do the competing claims have to be related to use interpleader?
No — Rule 22 applies even if the claims or the titles behind them share no common origin, aren’t identical, or are adverse to one another.
Source & verification. The rule text, Amendment History, and Notes are reproduced verbatim from the
official Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure (Alaska R. Civ. P. 22). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Alaska (Alaska Const. art. IV, § 15). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 6, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: interpleader Alaskacompeting claims to same fundstakeholder lawsuit AlaskaAlaska R. Civ. P. 22