(a) Joinder of Claims. A party asserting a claim to relief as an original claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, may join, either as independent or as alternate claims, as many claims either legal or equitable or both, within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the court, as the party has against an opposing party.
Rule 18.Joinder of claims and remedies
Group IV: Parties · Last amended July 1, 2002 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 18 lets a party join as many legal or equitable claims as it has against an opposing party in a single action, and lets a plaintiff combine a money claim with a claim to set aside a fraudulent conveyance without first winning a judgment.
Full Text of Rule 18
(b) Joinder of Remedies; Fraudulent Conveyances. Whenever a claim is one heretofore cognizable only after another claim has been prosecuted to a conclusion, the two claims may be joined in a single action; but the court shall grant relief in that action only in accordance with the relative substantive rights of the parties. In particular, a plaintiff may state a claim for money and a claim to have set aside a conveyance fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first having obtained a judgment establishing the claim for money.
Notes
Reporter’s Notes—2002 Amendment: Rule 18(a) is amended to reflect the abrogation of the District Court Civil Rules and the resulting applicability of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure to District Court civil actions. See Reporter’s Notes to simultaneous amendment of Rule 1. Like its predecessor, former D.C.C.R. 18(a), the rule does not permit joinder of claims in the District Court that are not within that court’s jurisdiction.
Reporter’s Notes: This rule is identical to Federal Rule 18, except that the provision of the federal rule for maritime claims is omitted. Rule 18(a) is one of the most important provisions of the rules, because it permits the parties to bring into a single action all claims depending between them, regardless of their subject matter and nature. Trial complexity may be avoided where necessary by severance under Rule 42(b). Vermont traditionally barred joinder of different causes of action. See Smith v. Badlam, 111 Vt. 328, 16 A.2d 182 (1940). By virtue of 12 V.S.A. § 971 (now superseded), however, the forms of action at law were abolished, and, under 12 V.S.A. § 1025 (now superseded), a party could “state as many separate claims or defenses as he has regardless of their consistency with one another.” This language was taken from Federal Rule 8(e)(2), which has been interpreted in the same broad fashion as Federal Rule 18(a). See 1A Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice and Procedure § 282 (Wright ed. 1961). It would thus seem that at law there was previously no obstacle to complete joinder. See O’Brien v. Comstock Foods, Inc., 125 Vt. 158, 212 A.2d 69 (1965). The major change which Rule 18(a) brings to Vermont practice is the joinder of legal and equitable claims, an essential feature of the merged system provided by the rules. Such joinder eliminates the need for transfer under 12 V.S.A. § 973 (now superseded) where legal and equitable relief are both appropriate on the same facts. See Cabot v. Hemingway, 115 Vt. 321, 58 A.2d 823 (1948). Rule 18(b) permits joinder of two distinct claims where recovery on one is a prerequisite to recovery on the second, without the necessity of reducing the first claim to judgment. Similar relief was allowed in chancery where a separate action at law for the damages was unavailable. See Hanks v. Hanks, 75 Vt. 273, 54 A. 959 (1903). It is not intended that, by virtue of Rule 18(b), an injured party may join defendant’s liability insurer in a tort action. Although such joinder might be literally within the rule, the federal courts have uniformly denied it in accordance with the policy of keeping the fact of liability insurance from the jury. See 2 Barron & Holtzoff, supra, § 505.
Amendment History
Amended Mar. 6, 2002, eff. July 1, 2002.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 18(a) removes any limit on what kinds of claims can travel together in one lawsuit. Once a party is already asserting a claim -- as an original claim, a counterclaim, a cross-claim, or a third-party claim -- that party can add as many other claims against the same opposing party as it has, legal or equitable, pleaded as independent or alternative theories, so long as the claims fall within the court's subject-matter jurisdiction. There is no requirement that the claims share a common transaction or occurrence; that limit belongs to Rule 20's test for joining additional parties, not to Rule 18's test for joining claims between parties already in the case.
Section (b) addresses a narrower problem: claims that could once be pursued only after another claim had already been carried to a conclusion. The rule lets both claims be joined in a single action, with the court awarding relief consistent with each party's actual substantive rights rather than treating the joined claims as interchangeable. The rule gives a concrete example: a plaintiff can combine a claim for money owed with a claim to set aside a conveyance that is fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first having to win a judgment on the money claim and file a second suit to reach the fraudulently conveyed property.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I bring several unrelated claims against the same opponent in one Vermont lawsuit?
Yes. Rule 18(a) lets a party join as many claims as it has against an opposing party, legal or equitable, as long as they fall within the court's subject-matter jurisdiction, without requiring that the claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence.
Does Rule 18 require the claims I join to be related to each other?
No. Rule 18(a) permits joinder of any claims a party has against an opposing party, related or not. The transaction-and-occurrence requirement applies instead to joining new parties under Rule 20.
What does the "joinder of remedies" provision in Rule 18(b) do?
It lets a party combine, in a single action, a claim and a second claim that could formerly be pursued only after the first was resolved, with the court granting relief consistent with the parties' actual substantive rights.
Can I sue to set aside a fraudulent conveyance before winning a judgment on the underlying debt?
Yes. Rule 18(b) specifically allows a plaintiff to state a claim for money owed together with a claim to set aside a conveyance fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first obtaining a judgment on the money claim.
Is there a limit on how many claims I can join under Rule 18?
The only stated limit is that the claims must be within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the court. Otherwise, a party may join as many claims, legal or equitable, as it has against an opposing party.
Source & verification. Rule text, official Reporter's Notes, and
amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure,
adopted by the Vermont Supreme Court. Last verified July 14, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: joinder of claims VermontVRCP 18fraudulent conveyance claimcombine claims single lawsuit