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 Arkansas, the rules regarding intervention in a lawsuit are governed by the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, Rule 24 outlines the conditions under which a non-party may intervene in an ongoing lawsuit. A person or entity may intervene in a lawsuit if they have an interest that is related to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and they are so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede their ability to protect that interest. The intervenor must claim an interest that might be impeded by the disposition of the case and that is not adequately represented by the existing parties. The intervention can be as of right or permissive, depending on the circumstances. The right to intervene exists if the intervenor's claim shares a common question of law or fact with the main action. If the intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties and the intervenor's claim or defense shares a common question of law or fact with the main action, the court may permit intervention. If a party opposes the intervention, they bear the burden of challenging it, typically by filing a motion to strike. A trial court may be found to have abused its discretion if it strikes an intervention that meets the criteria outlined above, does not excessively complicate the case, and is nearly essential to protect the intervenor’s interests.