Case BriefCiv Pro Unit C: Basic Joinder1/28/15Identity of CaseHohlbein v. Heritage Mutual Insurance Co. 106 F.R.D. (E.D. Wis. 1985)Memorandum and OrderPage 609 of the casebookSummary of Facts/Procedural History4 plaintiffs bring suits joined together against Wisconsin-based insurance company for fraudulent misrepresentation in their hiring practices. Defendant motions for severance, severance denied at this time. Statement of the IssueWhere plaintiff’s cases do not arise outside of the same temporal occurrences or transactions but may be based on a pattern of behavior, may they join their cases together? HoldingProbably. This is a discretionary issue. Judge says they will not sever at this time. ReasoningRequirement for joinder: Plaintiffs may join if they assert claim to relief jointly, from a claim arising out ofthe same occurrence/transaction/series of occurrences, and their trials will involve common questions of facts or law. The plaintiff’s argument works under the pattern of behavior argument. But if the pattern of behavior argument doesn’t work out, there is a good chance that these unrelated claims will prejudice the jury against the defendant for all of the plaintiff’s. It is in the defendant’s interest to split the trials up, and the judge has discretion to do so for rule 403 and other reasons. Evaluation Why is this a
View Full Document