In response to the February 9, 1978 order, Banco National de Cuba and CUBAEXPORT, jointly, and Karl Fessler filed claims to the fund; none of the other parties did. The Cuban parties also filed a cross-claim against the defendants Fessler and Tanvest, N. V., naming Peter Franklin Paul and the appellant here, Gilbert McDonald, as additional defendants. On December 10, 1979, the court denied the motions of Paul and McDonald to dismiss the cross-claims for want of jurisdiction and other grounds. 489 F. Supp. 434. The same allegations of fact and law supported the Cuban parties' claim to the interpleaded fund and their cross-claim.
Therefore, I find that Lind and Taylor properly are joined as third-party defendants on the counterclaim in this case.See Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Fernandez, 489 F. Supp. 434, 441 (S.D.Fla. 1979). In some cases, the joinder of additional parties raises jurisdictional problems.
It appears that Judge Conner was simply making the point earlier made in Wasserman: the court is alert to the need to protect persons not amenable to service within the forum state from possible abuse of the nationwide service feature in statutory interpleader. See 3A Moore's, supra, at ΒΆ 2215; Gaines v. Sunray Oil Company, 539 F.2d 1136, 1141-42 (8th Cir.1976) (discussed in Wasserman); Dean Witter Reynolds v. Fernandez, 489 F.Supp. 434, 441-42 (S.D.Fla.1979). Capitol, of course, was and is amenable to service in New York, where it has offices, does business and conducts litigation in state court.