§17.4 Comparison with Federal Rule

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§ 17.4COMPARISON WITH FEDERAL RULE

Treatment of Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a) can guide Washington litigators. "Because CR 17(a) is identical to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a), [courts] may look to federal authority for guidance and follow this authority if the reasoning is persuasive." Palidor v. Hovde, 164 Wn.App. 1016, No. 68112-5-1,2013 WL 1164423, at *7 (Mar. 18,2013) (citing Beal v. City of Seattle,134 Wn.2d 769, 777,954P.2d237 (1998)). To that end, this section compares CR 17 to its federal counterpart, including the differences between the two.

CR 17(a) is substantively identical to Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a), except that CR 17(a) does not contain the provision in the federal rule that, when a United States statute so provides, actions for the use or benefit of others shall be brought in the name of the United States. Because litigants normally bring such actions in federal court under 28 U.S.C. §1345, the distinction ordinarily will not affect state court practice. In addition, unlike Fed. R. Civ. P. 17, CR 17 includes an introductory section defining the terms "plaintiff and "defendant." Again, this introductory...