Improper joinder of causes of action” generally refers to pleading multiple claims or parties together when they do not belong in the same action—for example claims that don’t arise out of the same transaction or common question of law/fact, or joinder intended to defeat jurisdiction (fraudulent joinder); rules and terminology vary by jurisdiction. Best lawyers begin by carefully analyzing the pleadings and the governing joinder rules, then decide the appropriate procedural response: (1) attempt to resolve or narrow the issues by meet-and-confer or targeted amendments to the complaint, (2) if merited file a motion to sever or a motion to dismiss those improperly joined claims or parties (e.g., Rule 12(b)(6) or Rule 21-type motions in many systems), (3) seek remand or contest jurisdictional misjoinder if removal/diversity is at issue, (4) preserve the record and argue legal standards and precedent showing why joinder is improper (or why it is permissible), and (5) if the court allows joinder, request case-management orders to limit discovery and avoid prejudice; always document strategic choices and, because local procedure and case law control, consult jurisdiction-specific rules or a local practitioner for precise steps.
