From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Berman v. Automobile Ins. Co. of Hartford, Connecticut

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Aug 20, 1941
2 F.R.D. 94 (D.N.J. 1941)

Opinion

         Civil action by Oscar Berman, as receiver of Anchor Piece Dye Works, Incorporated, a New Jersey corporation, against the Automobile Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut, a Connecticut corporation. On defendant's motion to strike out a demand for trial by jury filed by plaintiff, pursuant to and in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 38, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.

         Demand for trial by jury stricken out, and case assigned to calendar of nonjury cases.

          Winne & Banta, of Hackensack, N. J. (by Walter G. Winne, of Hackensack, N. J.), for plaintiff.

          Cox & Walburg, of Newark, N. J. (by Harry E. Walburg, or Newark, N. J.), for defendant.


          SMITH, District Judge.

         The above-entitled action is before the court at this time on the motion of the defendant to strike a demand for trial by jury filed by the plaintiff, pursuant to and in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, Rule 38. The only question presented for determination is whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to a trial by jury as of right.

          The determination of the mode of trial must be pursuant to and in accordance with the established principles of the common law. Inquiry must be made into the nature of the cause of action and the appropriate remedy as they existed thereunder. If the cause of action is legal in its nature and formerly remediable in a court of law, the right of trial by jury cannot be denied; if however, the cause of action is equitable in its nature and formerly remediable in a court of equity, trial by jury should not be allowed.

          The complaint states a cause of action which, under the common law, was cognizable only in a court of equity, and prays relief peculiar to equity jurisdiction. The plaintiff, therefore, is not entitled to a trial by jury as of right.

         The authoritative decisions are collected in the memorandum filed by this Court in the case of Fitzpatrick et al. v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 1 F.R.D. 713.

         The demand for trial by jury is stricken and the case is assigned to the calendar of non-jury cases.


Summaries of

Berman v. Automobile Ins. Co. of Hartford, Connecticut

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Aug 20, 1941
2 F.R.D. 94 (D.N.J. 1941)
Case details for

Berman v. Automobile Ins. Co. of Hartford, Connecticut

Case Details

Full title:BERMAN v. AUTOMOBILE INS. CO. OF HARTFORD, CONN.

Court:United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Aug 20, 1941

Citations

2 F.R.D. 94 (D.N.J. 1941)

Citing Cases

Uthes v. Brownell

        Two decisions by Judge Smith of this District hold that there is no right to a jury trial where the…

Ravin v. New Jersey Bank, N.A.

Fund) or by the Superior Court in the exercise, as successor to the former Court of Chancery, of jurisdiction…