This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
The parties argue that the Fourth Circuit’s holdings in the case are fundamentally flawed.
Background and question before the Court
According to Petitioners, lincoln Property Company and the State of Wisconsin Investment Board are proper and diverse parties under diversity jurisdiction.
According to Petitioners, the real party in interest owns land and conducts substantial business in Virginia, creating a close nexus with the Commonwealth.
The Court considered whether Lincoln Property Company is a real party in interest to the controversy.
What each side argues
Petitioners
According to Petitioners, lincoln Property Company is a proper and diverse party under diversity jurisdiction.
According to Petitioners, the real party in interest owns land and conducts substantial business in Virginia, establishing a close nexus with the Commonwealth.
Respondents
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
What happened at oral argument
Justice Souter asked whether a special condition was enacted when a local defendant was involved.
According to Chief Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts queried whether Lincoln’s status as a real party in interest was critical to the petitioners’ position.
Justice Stevens asked whether the defendant ever claimed to have sued its own defendant.
According to Justice Ginsburg, justice Ginsburg questioned whether an indispensable party was missing, which could affect the plaintiff’s ability to proceed.
The Court noted that the “real party to the controversy” doctrine dates back to at least 1809 (Brown v. Strode).
The case was submitted after the oral argument concluded.
Chief Justice Roberts closed the session by asking if the Court had any further questions.
- [1] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 4
- [2] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 11
- [3] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 12
- [4] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 14
- [5] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 48
- [6] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 54
- [7] efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdf, p. 20
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- efcbec2af4297213c736-r1-fe26009936834979.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 21, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.