Also known as: third-party complaint · third party complaint · third party claim
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A pleading by which a defending party brings a nonparty into an existing action. The pleading asserts that the nonparty is or may be liable to the defending party for all or part of the claim asserted against it. The defending party may file the pleading as of right within fourteen days after serving its original answer. After that period the defending party must obtain leave of court by motion.
Lena sued CityRide Rentals in federal court for injuries from brake failure. CityRide answered the complaint. Sixty days later CityRide moved for leave to file a third-party complaint against Apex Auto Service seeking indemnity for the inspection work Apex performed. The court granted the motion because the fourteen-day period for filing as of right had expired.
Thomas Thompson sued Twin Rivers Bank for conversion of funds. Twin Rivers answered and promptly filed a third-party complaint against Thunderbolt Motors alleging that the motor company had converted the same funds and therefore owed indemnity. The third-party complaint brought Thunderbolt into the action as a new party potentially liable for the original claim.
Georgia O'Keeffe, a renowned artist, had three paintings stolen from An American Place gallery in New York in March 1946. The gallery was operated by her husband Alfred Stieglitz. The paintings subject to this action are "Seaweed" and "Cliffs," with a third painting "Fragments" also missing. O'Keeffe did not report the theft to the police or advertise the loss, though she discussed it with associates. Stieglitz died in the summer of 1946. In 1947 O'Keeffe retained Doris Bry to help settle the estate. Bry urged reporting the loss, but O'Keeffe declined. In 1972, O'Keeffe authorized Bry to report the theft to the Art Dealers Association of America, Inc., which maintains a registry of stolen paintings. In September 1975, O'Keeffe learned that the paintings were in the Andrew Crispo Gallery in New York on consignment from Bernard Danenberg Galleries. On February 11, 1976, O'Keeffe discovered that Ulrich A. Frank had sold the paintings to Barry Snyder for $35,000. She demanded their return, but Snyder refused. O'Keeffe filed her complaint for replevin in March 1976 against Snyder, who impleaded Frank as a third-party defendant. The trial court granted summary judgment to Snyder on the ground that the action was barred by the six-year statute of limitations. The Appellate Division reversed and entered judgment for O'Keeffe. The Supreme Court of New Jersey granted certification to consider the issues. Frank traces his possession of the paintings to his father, Dr. Frank, who died in 1968, claiming to have seen them in his father's apartment as early as 1941-1943. Snyder purchased the paintings from Frank in 1975. There are factual disputes regarding the circumstances of the paintings' disappearance and acquisition.
View caseTessa Takahashi sued Tidal Energy for wrongful death arising from a maritime accident. Tidal Energy answered and filed a third-party complaint against TechVista Solutions for contribution. The third-party complaint asserted that TechVista's negligence contributed to the death and that TechVista should share any liability Tidal Energy might owe to Tessa.
Edward Moragne was a longshoreman employed by Gulf Florida Terminal Company. On April 23, 1967, he was killed while working aboard the vessel Palmetto State in the Port of Miami, Florida. A beam supporting hatch covers fell on him during the stowage of a cargo of fertilizer. Petitioner, his widow and representative of his estate, brought suit in the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, against respondent States Marine Lines, Inc., the vessel owner. She sought damages for wrongful death and for pain and suffering prior to death. The claims rested on theories of both negligence and unseaworthiness. States Marine removed the case to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on diversity grounds under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441. It filed a third-party complaint against Gulf Florida Terminal Company. The complaint asserted that any negligence or unseaworthiness resulted from Gulf's stevedoring operations. Both defendants moved to dismiss the wrongful-death claim based on unseaworthiness. The District Court dismissed the unseaworthiness portion of the complaint, citing The Tungus v. Skovgaard, and certified the order for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether the Florida wrongful-death statute, Fla. Stat. § 768.01, encompassed unseaworthiness. The state court answered in the negative. On return to the Court of Appeals, that court affirmed the dismissal. Earlier related proceedings in state court had produced an affirmance by the Florida District Court of Appeal, 236 So. 2d 80, and denial of certiorari by the Florida Supreme Court, 239 So. 2d 829. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View caseA defendant may file a third-party complaint as of right only within fourteen days after serving its original answer. After that window the defendant must move for leave of court.
Supporting sources
A third-party complaint brings a new nonparty into the action. A crossclaim asserts a claim against an existing coparty such as one defendant against another defendant. The rules permit but do not require crossclaims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence.
Supporting sources
Supplemental jurisdiction extends to claims against third-party defendants when the claims form part of the same case or controversy as the anchor claim. In diversity-only cases the statute bars certain claims by plaintiffs against Rule 14 parties that would destroy complete diversity.
Supporting sources
In a diversity case a plaintiff may not assert a claim against a nondiverse third-party defendant if the claim would destroy complete diversity. The supplemental jurisdiction statute expressly withholds jurisdiction over such plaintiff claims against Rule 14 parties.
Supporting sources
…In the Point Landing suit, Wolff was named as a defendant. In that suit, Omni cross-claimed against Wolff and filed a third-party complaint against Gourlay. In the Smith and George suits, Omni filed a third-party complaint against both Wolff and Gourlay. In the Rosenberg suit, no move was made against either Wolff or…