Printable Format60-218. Joinder of claims; contingent claims. (a) In general. A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim or third-party claim, may join, as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing party.
(b) Joinder of contingent claims. A party may join two claims even though one of them is contingent on the disposition of the other, but the court may grant relief only in accordance with the parties' relative substantive rights. In particular, a plaintiff may state a claim for money and a claim to set aside a conveyance that is fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first obtaining a judgment for the money; a plaintiff may state in the original claim or an amended petition or in an answer or a reply, a claim to have any release, settlement or discharge of the original claim set aside as fraudulent or wrongfully procured.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-218; amended by Supreme Court order dated July 17, 1969; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 85; July 1.
Source or prior law:
(a). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 83; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 88; R.S. 1923, 60-601.
Cross References to Related Sections:
General rules of pleading, see 60-208.
Counterclaims and cross-claims, see 60-213.
Misjoinder not ground for dismissal; severance, see 60-221.
Consolidations; separate trials, see 60-242.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Commented upon prior to legislative enactment, George Templar, 31 J.B.A.K. 169, 170 (1962).
G.S. 60-601; survey of debtor-creditor law, Robert B. Morton, 12 K.L.R. 211, 223 (1963).
Discussion of wrongful death act, Robert C. Casad, 13 K.L.R. 515, 516 (1965).
Mentioned as apparently authorizing certain joinder not permitted under old code, Earl B. Shurtz, 14 K.L.R. 171, 177 (1965).
1963 changes in rules of the supreme court relating to appellate procedure, Emmet A. Blaes, 33 J.B.A.K. 19, 22 (1964).
Subsection (b); comment on creditor's remedies under civil procedure code in case of fraudulent conveyance, Charles L. Frickey, 17 K.L.R. 501, 505 (1969).
"ULRTA, Kansas, and the Common Law," Michael J. Davis, 21 K.L.R. 387, 413 (1973).
"The Kansas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act," Leon B. Graves, 68 J.K.B.A. No. 6, 34 (1999).
"New Problems with Removal and the ALI," Rebecca Martin, 54 K.L.R. 489 (2006).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-601 and the 1961 Supp. thereto.
1. Injunction to prevent director of property valuation from assessing and corporation commission from enforcing tax not improper joinder. National Van Lines v. Jones, 192 Kan. 338, 342, 388 P.2d 660.
2. Two plaintiffs cannot join in an action for their individual pain, suffering and mental anguish. Fields v. Anderson Cattle Co., 193 Kan. 558, 562, 396 P.2d 276.
3. No misjoinder where two defendants are charged with tort and the third on basis of respondeat superior. Beggarly v. Walker, 194 Kan. 61, 67, 397 P.2d 395.
4. Discussed; individuals suing for damages incurred in same collision do not have interest in same subject matter. Gardner v. Pereboom, 194 Kan. 231, 233, 398 P.2d 293.
5. Procedure afforded by subsection (b) not mandatory; plaintiff is entitled to maintain proceedings in the nature of a creditor's bill. Cadwallader v. Lehman, 202 Kan. 738, 748, 451 P.2d 163.
6. Mentioned in upholding motion to dismiss certain counts of petition; failure to state claim. Bicknell v. Jones, 203 Kan. 196, 202, 453 P.2d 127.
7. Cited in case concerning joinder of parties. McGregor v. Turner, 205 Kan. 386, 388, 469 P.2d 324.
8. Section permits but does not require joinder of separate claims; claim not res judicata. Parsons Mobile Products, Inc. v. Remmert, 216 Kan. 138, 139, 140, 531 P.2d 428.
9. Construed with K.S.A. 60-208; action based on tort barred by K.S.A. 60-513; new action based on contract allowed. Griffith v. Stout Remodeling, Inc., 219 Kan. 408, 412, 548 P.2d 1238.
10. A civil action for malicious prosecution is not the proper subject of a counterclaim. H & H Farms, Inc. v. Hazlett, 6 Kan. App. 2d 263, 270, 627 P.2d 1161.
11. Joinder of separate claims not required; res judicata does not apply to separate claims. Baca v. Walgreen Co., 6 Kan. App. 2d 505, 519, 630 P.2d 1185 (1981).