If a person described in Article641 cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether the action should proceed among the parties before it, or should be dismissed. The factors to be considered by the court include:
Art. 642.Determination By Court Whenever Joinder Not Feasible
Title III. Parties · Chapter 1. Joinder · Enacted 1995 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 30, 2026
In one sentenceArticle 642 tells a court what to weigh when a person who should be joined under Article 641 cannot be brought into the case, guiding the choice between letting the suit proceed without them and dismissing it outright.
Full Text of Art. 642
(1) To what extent a judgment rendered in the person's absence might be prejudicial to him or those already present.
(2) The extent to which the prejudice can be lessened or avoided by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or by other measures.
(3) Whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence will be adequate.
(4) Whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder.
Amendment History
Acts 1995, No. 662, §1.
Plain-English Summary
Sometimes a person who belongs in a lawsuit under Article 641 cannot be added — the court may lack power over them, or they cannot be found and served. Article 642 does not leave the court without direction. It lists four things to weigh: how much a judgment reached without that person would hurt them or the parties already in the case; whether the court can soften that harm by writing the judgment narrowly or adding protective conditions; whether a judgment reached without the missing person would settle the dispute in any meaningful way; and whether the plaintiff has another path to relief if the case gets thrown out for lack of that party.
These four factors work together rather than as a checklist to run down one at a time. A court might decide that a judgment limited to the parties before it, carefully worded to avoid binding the absent person's own rights, does enough good to justify moving forward. Or it might conclude that no version of the judgment can avoid unfairness, and that dismissal — leaving the plaintiff to refile somewhere the missing person can be reached — is the fairer outcome.
This article gives a court its options once Article 641 identifies the problem; Article 645 covers how that problem gets raised in the first place, and Article 646 covers what happens once the missing party can, after all, be added.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if the missing person cannot be sued in Louisiana at all?
The court weighs the four Article 642 factors and decides whether to proceed among the existing parties or dismiss the action, since the missing person cannot be forced into the Louisiana suit.
Can a court just proceed without the missing party to save time?
Only after weighing the prejudice to that person and the existing parties, the possibility of shaping the judgment to reduce harm, whether the judgment would settle anything, and whether the plaintiff has another remedy.
Is dismissal for nonjoinder the same as losing on the merits?
No. A dismissal under Article 642 leaves the underlying claim intact; the plaintiff can pursue it again once the missing party can be joined or found.
Does Article 642 apply if the missing person refuses to join?
Article 642 is for people who cannot be made a party at all. A person within reach who refuses to join voluntarily is instead handled under Article 644.
Source & verification. Article text is reproduced verbatim from
the vLex (Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, 2026 Edition). Enacted by the Louisiana Legislature.
Last verified July 30, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: what happens when a needed party cannot be joined Louisianaindispensable party dismissal LouisianaArticle 642 factorsproceed or dismiss for nonjoinderLouisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 642