A person or entity who is not a party to a lawsuit generally may intervene in the lawsuit and become a party to it by filing a plea in intervention prior to the entry of the court’s judgment—provided the court does not reject (strike) the intervention. An intervenor is not required to secure the court’s permission to intervene, and the party who opposed the intervention has the burden to challenge it by filing a motion to strike.

A person or entity has a right to intervene if the intervenor could have brought the same lawsuit, or any part of it in his own name—or, if the action had been brought against him, he would be able to defeat the lawsuit, or some part of it.

A trial court abuses its discretion by striking an intervention if (1) the intervenor meets the above test, (2) the intervention will not complicate the case by an excessive multiplication of the issues, and (3) the intervention is almost essential to effectively protect the intervenor’s interest.

In Alabama, the rules for intervention in a lawsuit are governed by the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, specifically Rule 24. According to this rule, a person or entity may intervene in an ongoing lawsuit if they have an interest that is related to the property or transaction that is the subject of the lawsuit. The intervenor must claim an interest that might be impaired by the disposition of the case and that interest must not be adequately represented by the existing parties. The intervenor can file a motion to intervene without needing to obtain permission from the court. However, if a party to the lawsuit opposes the intervention, they can challenge it by filing a motion to strike the intervention. The burden of challenging the intervention lies with the party opposing it. The court may strike an intervention if it fails to meet the criteria for intervention, excessively complicates the case, or is not essential to protect the intervenor’s interest. If the intervenor meets the criteria, does not unduly complicate the case, and the intervention is necessary to protect their interests, then striking the intervention could be considered an abuse of discretion by the court.