How does “transaction” differ from “occurrence” in the context of joinder?

In the context of joinder, the distinction between "transaction" and "occurrence" is significant in defining the scope of claims that can be joined in a single lawsuit. A "transaction" generally refers to a series of related events that form a cohesive story or transaction in a legal context. This might involve multiple acts, occurrences, or dealings that are connected to a central theme, leading to a legal issue.

On the other hand, an "occurrence" typically refers to a specific event that takes place. This could be a singular incident that gives rise to a cause of action but does not necessarily encompass a broader array of related events.

Thus, saying that a transaction refers to a series of related events captures the broader relational aspect of what can be grouped together in a lawsuit. In contrast, characterizing an occurrence as a specific event highlights its singularity and focus on an isolated incident. This differentiation is critical for determining how claims can be linked and whether they arise from the same nucleus of operative fact, which is essential for proper joinder and the application of supplemental jurisdiction.