Rule 1.407.Interventions

Rule 1.407(1) sets out intervention of right: on timely application, anyone must be permitted to intervene when a statute confers an unconditional right to do so, or when the applicant claims an interest in the property or transaction at issue and the disposition of the action may, as a practical matter, impair or impede the applicant's ability to protect that interest — unless an existing party already adequately represents it. Rule 1.407(2) covers permissive intervention, which the court may allow rather than must: when a statute confers a conditional right, when the applicant's claim or defense shares a common question of law or fact with the main action, or when a government officer or agency relies on a statute, executive order, or related regulation that a party has invoked. In deciding permissive intervention, the court weighs whether allowing it will unduly delay or prejudice the existing parties' case.

Getting into the case takes a specific procedural step: Rule 1.407(3) requires the person seeking to intervene to serve a motion to intervene on the existing parties, stating the grounds for intervention, accompanied by a pleading that sets out the claim or defense the intervenor wants to raise.

Rule 1.407(4) tells the court how to rule. Intervention of right must be granted unless the applicant's interest is already adequately represented; permissive intervention is granted or denied as the circumstances require. Either way, an intervenor gains no right to delay the underlying case, and must pay the costs the intervention causes unless the intervenor ultimately prevails. The official Committee Comment to the rule explains that it adopted provisions much like the federal intervention rule, giving trial courts more discretion in deciding whether to let a new party into an existing case.