19.01 Persons to be Joined if Feasible A person who is subject to service of process shall be joined as a party in the action if (a) in the person’s absence complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties, or (b) the person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in the person’s absence may (1) as a practical matter impair or impede the person’s ability to protect that interest or (2) leave any one already a party subject to a substantial risk or incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of the person’s claimed interest. If the person has not been so joined, the court shall order that the person be made a party. If the person should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, the person may be made a defendant, or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff.
Rule 19.Joinder of Persons Needed for Just Adjudication
Last verified July 1, 2026
In one sentenceRule 19 requires that anyone whose absence would leave a case unable to give complete relief, or would risk harming that absent person’s own interests, be added to the lawsuit if at all possible, and tells the court what to do if that person cannot be added.
Full Text of Rule 19
19.02 Determination by Court Whenever Joinder Not Feasible If a person as described in Rule 19.01 cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it, or should be dismissed, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable. The factors to be considered by the court include:
a to what extent a judgment rendered in the person’s absence might be prejudicial to the person or those already parties;
b the extent to which, by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided;
c whether a judgment rendered in the person’s absence will be adequate; and
d whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder.
19.03 Pleading Reasons for Nonjoinder A pleading asserting a claim for relief shall state the names, if known to the pleader, of any persons as described in Rule 19.01 who are not joined, and the reasons why they are not joined.
Plain-English Summary
Some lawsuits cannot be resolved without a particular person or entity in the room. Rule 19 identifies who counts as a necessary party: someone whose absence would prevent the court from giving complete relief to the parties already involved, or someone who has a claimed interest in the subject of the case such that deciding the case without them could practically hurt their ability to protect that interest, or could leave an existing party facing double or inconsistent obligations. If such a person can be served with process, the court orders that they be added. If they belong on the plaintiff’s side but will not join voluntarily, they can be made a defendant instead, or even an involuntary plaintiff in the right circumstances.
Sometimes a necessary person cannot be brought into the case at all — maybe they are outside the court’s reach. When that happens, the court has to decide, weighing fairness and practicality, whether the case should go forward without them or be dismissed because they are considered indispensable. The rule lists four things the court looks at: how much a judgment made without that person might hurt them or the existing parties; whether the judgment can be shaped or limited to reduce that harm; whether a judgment without them would settle things adequately; and whether the plaintiff would have any other way to get relief if the case were thrown out.
Any pleading that states a claim has to name any such absent necessary parties, if the pleader knows who they are, and explain why they have not been joined. And this entire rule takes a back seat to Rule 23 when the case is proceeding as a class action, since class actions have their own framework for representing absent people’s interests.
Frequently Asked Questions
What makes someone a “necessary party” who has to be joined if possible?
Someone is a necessary party if the case cannot give complete relief without them, or if deciding the case without them could practically harm their own interest in the subject matter or expose an existing party to inconsistent obligations.
What happens if a necessary party cannot be joined?
The court decides, weighing factors like potential prejudice, whether that prejudice can be reduced, whether a judgment without the person would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff has another remedy, whether to proceed without that person or dismiss the case.
Do I have to name people I did not join in my complaint?
Yes, if you know of any such persons under this rule, your pleading must state their names and explain why they were not joined.
Does this rule apply to class actions?
No, Rule 19 is explicitly subject to Rule 23’s separate provisions for class actions.
If someone belongs on my side of the case but refuses to join, what can I do?
The rule allows that person to be made a defendant, or in appropriate cases, an involuntary plaintiff.
Source & verification. The rule text and Advisory Committee Comments are reproduced verbatim from the
official Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure (Minn. R. Civ. P. 19). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Minnesota (Minn. Stat. § 480.051). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 1, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: indispensable party rulenecessary party rule