20. Which of the following motions has the greatest likelihood of success?

B is correct. Generally, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) allow the joinder of all claims between parties and all claims arising out of the same transaction. Permissive joinder (FRCP0 20) allows a plaintiff to join multiple defendants IF:

(i) some claim against each defendant relates to or arises out of the same series of occurrences or transactions; AND

(ii) there is a question of fact or law common to all parties.

Here, the man is attempting to join two separate claims against two separate defendants. There are no facts indicating that either claim arises out of the same transaction, or that there is a common question of law or fact. As such, the driver has been improperly joined and a motion to sever has the highest likelihood of success against the misjoinder.

A is incorrect. There is diversity jurisdiction here because the man is not a citizen of State B. The requirement of complete diversity is not destroyed if two or more defendants (or two or more plaintiffs) are citizens of the same state.

Here, the plaintiff is a citizen of State A and the defendants are citizens of State B, establishing complete diversity.

C is incorrect. Even if the woman is not a required party under the FRCP, she might still be able to be permissively joined if the requirements for joinder were satisfied. The proper response to misjoinder is not a motion to dismiss based on a non-required party, but a motion to sever the improperly-joined defendant.

D is incorrect. Where jurisdiction is concurrent between federal and state court, the plaintiff makes the initial decision whether to use state or federal court by filing his case. As such, a motion to dismiss would have no legal grounds here, where the man filed a properly-pleaded lawsuit based on federal diversity jurisdiction.