Intervention is the act of a third party who attempts to become a party in a lawsuit that is already pending between others. Hill v L F Transp, Inc, 277 Mich App 500, 508 (2008).
A person has the right to intervene in an action by filing a timely application, when:
(1) a Michigan statute or court rule provides an unconditional right to intervene;
(2) all parties stipulate to the intervention; or
(3) the applicant claims an interest in the property or transaction which is the subject of the action, and without intervention, the applicant may not be able to adequately protect his or her interest, unless the applicant’s interest is adequately represented by existing parties. MCR 2.209(A).
A person may intervene in an action by filing a timely application, when:
(1) a Michigan statute or court rule provides a conditional right to intervene; or
(2) when an applicant’s claim or defense and the main action share a common question of law or fact. MCR 2.209(B).
“In exercising its discretion, the court shall consider whether the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties.” MCR 2.209(B)(2).
A right to intervene should be asserted within a reasonable time. D’Agostini v Roseville, 396 Mich 185, 188 (1976). “Laches or unreasonable delay by the intervenors is a proper reason to deny intervention.”1 Id.
To be considered a timely application for permissive intervention, the application must be made before an adjudication of the case on the merits. Dean v Dep’t of Corrections, 208 Mich App 144, 152 (1994).2
MCR 2.209 should be liberally construed to allow intervention in situations where the intervenor’s interests may not be adequately represented. Neal v Neal, 219 Mich App 490, 492 (1996). It may not be proper in cases “where it will have the effect of delaying the action or producing a multifariousness of parties and causes of action.” Precision Pipe & Supply, Inc v Meram Constr, Inc, 195 Mich App 153, 157 (1992).
It is within the trial court’s discretion to determine whether a motion to intervene as of right is timely when the moving party had knowledge of the action, and the motion was not filed until after the circuit court issued its decision. Davenport v Grosse Pointe Farms Zoning Bd, 210 Mich App 400, 408 (1995).
Once permitted to intervene, either as of right or by leave, the intervenor becomes a party and is bound by the judgment. BCBSM v Eaton Rapids Community Hosp, 221 Mich App 301, 307 (1997).
A party who intervenes in an action as a plaintiff hoping to recover damages from the defendant, but who does not actively participate in the prosecution of the action, is a party in interest for the limited purposes of recovering damages from the defendant and subjecting itself to the taxation of costs in the defendant’s favor, where the defendant is the prevailing party in the action. See BCBSM v Eaton Rapids Community Hosp, 221 Mich App 301, 309-312 (1997); MCR 2.625(A).
A trial court’s decision to grant or deny a motion to intervene is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Hill v L F Transp, Inc, 277 Mich App 500, 507 (2008).
1 See Section 9.6(D) for additional discussion of the doctrine of laches.
2 A pleading or other document may be deemed presented for filing on the date it is deposited into the institution’s outgoing mail if the appellant is pro se, is incarcerated in prison or jail, and meets the other requirements of MCR 1.112.