Group IV: Parties · Last amended March 1, 2011 · Last verified July 15, 2026
In one sentenceRule 19 requires joining a person to a lawsuit whenever the court cannot give complete relief without them or their absence would risk impairing their interests or exposing an existing party to inconsistent obligations, and directs the court to weigh dismissal when a required person cannot be joined.
(1)Required party. A person who is subject to service of process and whose joinder will not deprive the court of subject-matter jurisdiction 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 that 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 of 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 non-joinder.
(c)Pleading the reasons for non-joinder. 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 rule is subject to Rule 23.
Explanatory Note
Rule 19 was amended, effective March 1, 2011. Rule 19 is derived from Fed.R.Civ.P. 19. Rule 19 was amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendments are technical in nature and no substantive change is intended. Rule 19 was amended, effective March 1, 2011, in response to the December 1, 2007, revision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 19(a) identifies who must be joined if it's feasible to do so. A person subject to service of process, whose joinder wouldn't destroy the court's subject-matter jurisdiction, must be added if the court can't give complete relief among the existing parties without them, or if that person claims an interest in the case and staying out could, as a practical matter, impair their ability to protect that interest or leave an existing party facing double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations. When someone required has not been joined, the court must order it; a person who won't join voluntarily as a plaintiff can instead be made a defendant or, in the right case, an involuntary plaintiff. And if adding a party would spoil venue and that party objects, the court must dismiss that party rather than let venue fail.
Rule 19(b) covers the harder case — when a required person can't be joined, perhaps because the court lacks jurisdiction over them. There, the court decides, in equity and good conscience, whether the case should go forward without that person or be dismissed instead. It weighs how much a judgment made without the person might prejudice either that person or the existing parties, whether protective terms, reshaped relief, or other measures could reduce that prejudice, whether a judgment reached without the person would still be adequate, and whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the case were dismissed for non-joinder.
Rule 19(c) requires a party pleading a claim to name any required person who hasn't been joined, if the party knows who that is, and to explain why. Rule 19(d) makes the whole rule give way to Rule 23's separate framework for class actions.
Frequently Asked Questions
When must a person be joined as a required party under Rule 19?
Rule 19(a)(1) requires joinder when the court can't give complete relief among the existing parties without that person, or when the person claims an interest in the action and staying out could impair their ability to protect it or expose an existing party to inconsistent obligations.
What happens if a required party refuses to join the lawsuit voluntarily?
Rule 19(a)(2) allows the court to make that person a defendant instead, or, in the right circumstances, an involuntary plaintiff, rather than proceeding without them.
What does the court weigh when a required party can't be joined at all?
Rule 19(b) directs the court to consider potential prejudice to the absent person or existing parties, whether that prejudice can be reduced through protective terms or reshaped relief, whether a judgment without the person would be adequate, and whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the case were dismissed.
Can joining a required party cause the whole case to be dismissed?
Yes. If a required party can't feasibly be joined, Rule 19(b) allows the court to dismiss the action entirely, rather than proceed without that person, when equity and good conscience call for it.
Do I have to explain in my pleading why someone wasn't joined?
Yes. Rule 19(c) requires a party asserting a claim to name, if known, any person required to be joined but not joined, and to state the reasons for not joining them.
Source & verification. Rule text and the Explanatory Note are
reproduced verbatim from the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the
Supreme Court of North Dakota. Last verified July 15, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:nd required joinder of partiesindispensable party north dakota rule 19involuntary plaintiff nd ruledismissal for failure to join party ndcomplete relief joinder north dakota