When ∆1 files a counterclaim regarding the ski incident, is it considered a compulsory counterclaim?

The correct answer is based on the principles of compulsory counterclaims as outlined in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A counterclaim is considered compulsory if it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the opposing party's claim and does not require adding another party over whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.

In this case, since ∆1's counterclaim is regarding the same ski incident that is the subject of the original claim, it directly relates to the same set of facts and circumstances. This connection satisfies the requirement that the counterclaim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence, making it compulsory.

Understanding the nature of compulsory counterclaims is essential in ensuring that related disputes are resolved in a single legal proceeding, thereby promoting judicial efficiency and preventing multiple lawsuits over the same incident. Consequently, the determination of whether a counterclaim is compulsory depends critically on its relationship to the original claim, which in this scenario, the shared context of the ski incident provides.