Also known as: same series of acts or transaction · series of acts or transactions · transaction or occurrence · same transaction or occurrence
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural connection between claims or offenses that permits joinder or the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction when the events share a common factual nucleus.
Samuel Soto sued Sapphire Technologies for breach of a software licensing agreement. Sapphire responded with a claim that Soto had misused the software in a manner that violated the same licensing terms. The court treated the misuse claim as arising from the same series of acts or transactions because both parties' allegations centered on the identical contract and performance period.
Steven Silva brought a federal wage claim against Summit Bank for underpayment on one construction project. He also asserted state-law breach claims for unpaid invoices on several other jobs performed for the same client during the same months. The court examined whether the state claims shared a common nucleus with the federal claim before deciding whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Santiago Sanchez and Sylvia Santos were named as codefendants in a products liability suit. Sanchez filed a crossclaim against Santos alleging that Santos's negligent installation of the product caused the injury at issue. The court permitted the crossclaim because it arose from the same series of acts or transactions that formed the basis of the original action.
Sebastian Santos sued Southland Foods for two separate shipments of spoiled goods delivered under different purchase orders. The court required the claims to be pleaded in separate counts because each shipment constituted a distinct transaction or occurrence that would not promote clarity if combined in a single count.
Scott Summers and a codefendant were charged with conspiracy to distribute narcotics and with substantive distribution offenses. The court upheld joinder because the substantive counts arose from the same series of acts or transactions that the conspiracy count alleged.
Sylvia Santos was acquitted of robbing one poker player and later prosecuted for robbing a second player at the same table during the same holdup. The court held that the second prosecution violated double jeopardy because both offenses arose from the same series of acts or transactions.
Offenses qualify when they are connected by a common plan or when the evidence needed to prove one offense would also be relevant to proving the others. Courts examine whether the acts share participants, timing, location, or a unifying scheme rather than treating each offense in isolation.
Supporting sources
The test determines whether state and federal claims derive from a common nucleus of operative fact. If the claims arise from the same underlying events, a federal court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction even though the state claims lack an independent basis for federal jurisdiction.
Supporting sources
No. The claim must still arise from the same transaction or occurrence that forms the subject matter of the opposing party's claim. Timing of acquisition alone does not create the required factual connection.
Supporting sources
…of related claims in a single lawsuit. Rule 13 makes compulsory (upon pain of a bar) all counterclaims arising out of the same transaction or occurrence from which the plaintiff's claim arose. Rule 14 extends this compulsion to third-party defendants. Rule 18 permits very broad joinder of claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, and third-party…