Also known as: third-party actions · third party action · third party actions · impleader · third-party claim
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A claim asserted by a defendant in an existing civil action against a person not previously a party to the suit. The claim typically seeks indemnity, contribution, or other relief arising from the same transaction or occurrence that gave rise to the original complaint. The third-party defendant is brought into the action so that all related liabilities can be resolved in a single proceeding.
Tonya Takahashi sued Threshold Capital for breach of contract. Threshold Capital then asserted a claim against Tidal Energy for indemnity on the same contract dispute. The court permitted the joinder because the indemnity claim was independent of the original breach claim and could be resolved together.
Tobias Thomas sued Tundra Resources on a tort claim. Tundra Resources filed a third-party action against Topaz Mining for contribution. The court entered final judgment on the original claim after determining no just reason for delay existed, allowing immediate appeal while the third-party claim continued.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Theresa Tucker sued several manufacturers in a mass-tort action. One defendant filed a third-party action against its insurers seeking declaratory relief on coverage for any settlement. The insurers remained parties to the overall litigation while the coverage dispute proceeded separately.
Tori Taylor sued a diverse defendant in federal court. The defendant impleaded a nondiverse third party in a third-party action for indemnity. The original plaintiff then attempted to assert a direct claim against the impleaded party, but the court lacked supplemental jurisdiction because the claim destroyed complete diversity.
Tyler Taylor challenged an agency decision. The agency filed a third-party action against a surety to recover on the same underlying obligation. The court exercised jurisdiction over the third-party claim because it related directly to the original dispute.
Tamara Tan sued a theater operator for antitrust violations. The defendant filed a third-party action against a supplier. The court scheduled the third-party claim for separate trial after the main action to preserve the plaintiff's right to a jury trial on the original claims.
A court may strike, sever, or order separate trial of a third-party claim when doing so serves judicial economy or avoids prejudice. The decision rests on factors such as whether the claim shares common questions with the main action and whether trying the claims together would confuse the jury or delay resolution.
Supporting sources
Dismissal of the main claim does not automatically end a third-party claim. The court retains discretion to keep the third-party action alive if it has an independent jurisdictional basis or if fairness requires resolution of the indemnity or contribution issues.
Supporting sources
A third-party claim for indemnity or contribution usually falls within supplemental jurisdiction because it arises from the same nucleus of facts as the original claim. However, a plaintiff's subsequent claim against a nondiverse third-party defendant cannot rely on supplemental jurisdiction when original jurisdiction rests solely on diversity.
Supporting sources
Fees incurred defending a separate third-party action forced by the defendant's tort may be recovered as consequential damages. Fees incurred in the present suit against the original tortfeasor remain subject to the American rule and are not recoverable as damages.
Supporting sources
…at 377. Federal courts, by the time of Kroger , were routinely exercising ancillary jurisdiction over compulsory counterclaims, impleader claims, cross-claims among defendants, and claims of parties who intervened "of right." See id. , at 375, n. 18 (collecting cases). In Kroger , however, "the nonfederal claim . . . was…