Misjoinder of parties is not ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or of its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a party may be severed and proceeded with separately.

Annotation Law reviews. For article, “Pleadings, Rules 7 to 25 “, see 28 Dicta 368 (1951). For article, “New Role for Nonparties in Tort Actions-The Empty Chair”, see 15 Colo. Law. 1650 (1986). Common-law rule altered. This rule alters the common-law rule requiring dismissal of an entire action in which parties have been improperly joined. King v. W.R. Hall Transp. & Storage Co., 641 P.2d 916 (Colo. 1982). The proper remedy for misjoinder is to require the party against whom the objection lies to bring in such additional parties as are required or permitted by the rules. Krueger v. Merriman Elec., 29 Colo. App. 492, 488 P.2d 228 (1971). This requirement can be met either by actually joining the omitted party or by establishing that the rights of the omitted party are properly under the jurisdiction of the court for determination. Krueger v. Merriman Elec., 29 Colo. App. 492, 488 P.2d 228 (1971). The latter result can be accomplished by an assignment of the right of action to the person who actually prosecutes it, inasmuch as assignments for collection have long been recognized as valid in Colorado, and the assignee thereof is the real party in interest and entitled to prosecute the claim. Krueger v. Merriman Elec., 29 Colo. App. 492, 488 P.2d 228 (1971). Under this rule parties may be added by order of court on motion at any stage of the proceeding. Lerner v. Stone, 126 Colo. 589, 252 P.2d 533 (1952). This rule gives a trial court authority, even if one has been made a party, to later sever the claims and to proceed with them separately. Centennial Cas. Co. v. Lacey, 133 Colo. 357, 295 P.2d 690 (1956). Dropping of party under this rule is equivalent to dismissal without prejudice of the claim against that party. King v. W.R. Hall Transp. & Storage Co., 641 P.2d 916 (Colo. 1982). Decision to drop parties is within sound discretion of the court and will not be disturbed on appeal unless abuse is shown. King v. W.R. Hall Transp. & Storage Co., 641 P.2d 916 (Colo. 1982). Applied in Reed Auto Sales, Inc. v. Empire Delivery Serv., Inc., 127 Colo. 205, 254 P.2d 1018 (1953); Linke v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 129 Colo. 165, 268 P.2d 416 (1954); W.R. Hall Transp. & Storage Co. v. King, 43 Colo. App. 202, 606 P.2d 75 (1979); B.C. Inv. Co. v. Throm, 650 P.2d 1333 (Colo. App. 1982); Weyerhaeuser Mortgage Co. v. Equitable General Insurance Co., 686 P.2d 1357 (Colo. App. 1983).