K.S.A. 60-219.Required joinder of parties; feasibility
Last amended July 1, 2010 · Last verified July 28, 2026
In one sentenceK.S.A. 60-219 requires a court to join a person as a necessary party whenever complete relief needs that person or the person's absence risks impairing their interest or exposing existing parties to inconsistent obligations, and directs the court to weigh prejudice, adequacy of relief, and remedy if joinder isn't feasible.
(1)Required party. A person who is subject to service of process must be joined as a party if:
(A)In that person's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties; or
(B)that person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that disposing of the action in the person's absence may:
(i)As a practical matter, impair or impede the person's ability to protect the interest; or
(ii)leave an existing party subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple or otherwise inconsistent obligations because of the interest.
(2)Joinder by court order. If a person has not been joined as required, the court must order that the person be made a party. A person who refuses to join as a plaintiff may be made either a defendant or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff.
(3)Venue. If a joined party objects to venue and the joinder would make venue improper, the court must dismiss the party.
(b)When joinder is not feasible. If a person who is required to be joined if feasible cannot be joined, the court must determine whether, in equity and good conscience, the action should proceed among the existing parties or should be dismissed. The factors for the court to consider include:
(1)The extent to which a judgment rendered in the person's absence might prejudice that person or the existing parties;
(2)the extent to which any prejudice could be lessened or avoided by:
(A)Protective provisions in the judgment;
(B)shaping the relief; or
(C)other measures;
(3)whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence would be adequate; and
(4)whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the action were dismissed for nonjoinder.
(c)Pleading the reasons for nonjoinder. When asserting a claim for relief, a party must state:
(1)The name, if known of any person who is required to be joined if feasible, but is not joined; and
(2)the reasons for not joining that person.
(d)Exception for class actions. This section is subject to the provisions of K.S.A. 60-223, and amendments thereto.
(e)Nominee. In an action in which any relief sought would determine title or affect a security interest in real property, a person who is subject to service of process must be joined as a party if the person is a nominee of record on behalf of a beneficial owner of a claimed interest in the property that is the subject of the action. The nominee need not be a party required to be joined under subsection (a)(1).
Amendment History
L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-219; amended by Supreme Court order dated July 17, 1969; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 86; July 1.
Plain-English Summary
Subsection (a)(1) defines who counts as a required party: someone subject to service of process must be joined if, without them, the court can't grant complete relief among the parties already in the case, or if that person claims an interest in the subject of the action and their absence could, as a practical matter, impair their ability to protect that interest or leave an existing party facing double, multiple, or inconsistent obligations because of it. If such a person hasn't been joined, subsection (a)(2) requires the court to order them made a party -- and a person who won't join as a plaintiff can be made a defendant, or, in the right case, an involuntary plaintiff. Subsection (a)(3) protects venue: if a party the court adds objects that joining them makes venue improper, the court must dismiss that party rather than force the venue problem onto the case.
Subsection (b) covers what happens when joinder isn't feasible -- the required person can't be brought into the case. There the court has to decide, in equity and good conscience, whether the action should go forward without that person or be dismissed instead, weighing four factors: how much a judgment in that person's absence might prejudice them or the parties already there, how much any prejudice could be reduced through protective terms in the judgment, shaping the relief, or other measures, whether a judgment issued without that person would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the court dismissed for nonjoinder.
Subsection (c) requires a party asserting a claim to name, if known, any required person who hasn't been joined, and to state the reasons that person wasn't joined. Subsection (d) makes this whole section subject to K.S.A. 60-223's class-action provisions. Subsection (e) adds a targeted rule for property disputes: in an action where the relief sought would determine title to, or affect a security interest in, real property, a nominee of record acting for a beneficial owner of a claimed interest in that property must be joined if subject to service of process, even though that nominee doesn't independently meet the definition of a required party under subsection (a)(1).
Frequently Asked Questions
When does Kansas law require joining someone as a party to my lawsuit?
Subsection (a)(1) requires joinder of anyone subject to service of process whose absence would prevent the court from granting complete relief, or who claims an interest in the case such that their absence could impair their ability to protect it or expose an existing party to inconsistent obligations.
What happens if a required party can't be brought into the case?
Subsection (b) requires the court to weigh, in equity and good conscience, whether to proceed without that person or dismiss the action, considering possible prejudice to that person or the existing parties, whether protective measures could reduce that prejudice, whether a judgment without them would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff has an adequate remedy if the case is dismissed.
Can someone be forced to join a lawsuit as a plaintiff against their will?
Yes, indirectly. Subsection (a)(2) allows the court to make a person who refuses to join as a plaintiff into a defendant instead, or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff.
Do I have to explain in my petition why I didn't join someone required by this rule?
Yes, if you know their identity. Subsection (c) requires stating the name of any required person not joined and the reasons for not joining them.
Does this rule affect who has to be joined in real estate title disputes?
Yes. Subsection (e) requires joining a record nominee acting for a beneficial owner of a claimed property interest, when the action would determine title or affect a security interest in that real property, even if that nominee wouldn't otherwise qualify as a required party under subsection (a)(1).
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from the
Kansas Statutes Annotated, enacted by the Kansas Legislature. Last verified July 28, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:kansas required party joinder60-219 kansas indispensable partynecessary party lawsuit kansasjoinder not feasible kansas civil procedurekansas nominee real property joinder