Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In a court of law, a party's claim is a counterclaim if one party asserts claims in response to the claims of another. In other words, if a plaintiff initiates a lawsuit and a defendant responds to the lawsuit with claims of their own against the plaintiff, the defendant's claims are "counterclaims." Examples of counterclaims include:
A crossclaim is a claim asserted between codefendants or coplaintiffs in a case and that relates to the subject of the original claim or counterclaim according to Black's Law Dictionary. A crossclaim is filed against someone who is a co-defendant or co-plaintiff to the party who originates the crossclaim.
Counter-claims and cross claims do not require personal service because no new parties are being added to the lawsuit. In some state court systems, a contribution claim must be opened as a new case, and thus the defendant must pay for a filing fee, docket number, or index number. In other states, however, no additional fee is required.
Within a "single" lawsuit, there can be any number of claims and defenses (all based on numerous laws) between any number of plaintiffs or defendants. Each of these participants can bring any number of cross-claims and counterclaims against each other, and even bring additional parties into the suit on either side after it progresses.
The third-party defendant must then assert any defense under Rule 12 and any counterclaim under Rule 13(a), and may assert any counterclaim under Rule 13(b) or any cross-claim under Rule 13(g). Rule 14(a)(4): Any party may move to strike the third-party claim, to sever it, or to try it separately.
First adopted in 1975, the Federal Rules of Evidence codify the evidence law that applies in United States federal courts. [1] In addition, many states in the United States have either adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence, with or without local variations, or have revised their own evidence rules or codes to at least partially follow the federal rules.
The Court found this argument to be non-meritorious in light of similar Indian law precedents. [28] Ancillary jurisdiction. The final question before the Court was whether the District Court rightly exercised ancillary jurisdiction over the counties' cross-claim against the state for indemnification. The Court rejected, as having "no basis in ...
Section 15 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 provided: [A]ll the said courts of the United States, shall have power in the trial of actions at law, on motion and due notice thereof being given, to require the parties to produce books or writings in their possession or power, which contain evidence pertinent to the issue, in cases and under circumstances where they might be compelled to produce the ...