Misjoinder of parties is not ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or of its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a party may be severed and proceeded with separately.
Rule 21.Misjoinder and nonjoinder of parties
Group IV: Parties · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 21 provides that misjoinder of parties is never grounds for dismissing an action, and lets the court add or drop parties, or sever a claim for separate handling, on motion or its own initiative at any stage of the case.
Full Text of Rule 21
Notes
Reporter’s Notes: This rule is identical to Federal Rule 21. The federal rule was the basis for 12 V.S.A. § 1071b (now superseded), which, however, also provided that nonjoinder should not be cause for dismissal. See also 12 V.S.A. § 1071 (now superseded). The rule eliminates the reference to nonjoinder, which may in fact be a ground for dismissal under Rule 19(b) if jurisdiction over the missing party cannot be obtained. See Reporter’s Notes to Rule 19. Where a missing party can be served, however, then he should be added on motion under this rule if the court finds that his joinder is necessary or desirable. Cf. John v. Fernandez, 124 Vt. 346, 205 A.2d 552 (1964); Wilbur v. University of Vermont, 127 Vt. 283, 247 A.2d 897 (1968); former Chancery Rule 12.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 21 states a simple protective rule: joining the wrong parties does not sink an otherwise valid case. Misjoinder of parties is not ground for dismissal of an action. Instead, the court can drop or add parties by order, either on a party's motion or on its own initiative, at any stage of the action, and on whatever terms are just under the circumstances. Any claim against a party can also be severed and proceeded with separately, letting the court untangle a case that has grown unwieldy without throwing out the whole proceeding.
The rule works alongside Rule 19: while misjoinder can always be fixed rather than fatal, nonjoinder of a party who turns out to be indispensable and cannot be brought into the case may still lead to dismissal under Rule 19(b). Where a missing party can be served, though, Rule 21 gives the court a clear path to add them on motion whenever their joinder is necessary or desirable to the case.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a Vermont case be dismissed just because the wrong parties were joined?
No. Rule 21 states directly that misjoinder of parties is not a ground for dismissal of an action.
How does a party get added to or dropped from a pending lawsuit?
By order of the court, on the motion of any party or on the court's own initiative, at any stage of the action and on terms the court finds just.
Does the court need a party's motion before it can add or drop a party?
No. Rule 21 lets the court act on its own initiative, in addition to acting on a party's motion.
Can a claim against one party be handled separately from the rest of the case?
Yes. Rule 21 allows any claim against a party to be severed and proceeded with separately.
If misjoinder isn't grounds for dismissal, can failing to join a party ever lead to dismissal?
Yes, in a different circumstance. Nonjoinder of a person who is indispensable under Rule 19(b) and who cannot be brought into the case can still result in dismissal, even though misjoinder alone under Rule 21 cannot.
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: misjoinder of parties VermontVRCP 21add or drop partiessever claim Vermont