Beacon Theatres v. Westover
Fox sued Beacon to get declaratory and injunctive relief; Beacon has legal counterclaim (so…does it go to a jury or not?)
H - If one party would be entitled to a jury trial, it cannot be deprived of that right merely b/c another party took the advantage of the availability of equitable relief and sued first. If there are legal AND equitable issues (and they overlap), MUST TRY LEGAL ISSUE FIRST (judge in equity will be bound by jury’s finding on remaining issues)
H - If one party would be entitled to a jury trial, it cannot be deprived of that right merely b/c another party took the advantage of the availability of equitable relief and sued first. If there are legal AND equitable issues (and they overlap), MUST TRY LEGAL ISSUE FIRST (judge in equity will be bound by jury’s finding on remaining issues)
Tags: Right to Jury
Quelle:
Quelle:
Dairy Queen v. Wood
DQ sues Wood franchisee for temporary and permanent injunction, accounting to determine $ lost, and injunction pending the accounting – equitable on its face (REALLY legal b/c want $)
Right to a jury trial is preserved in cases involving both legal & equitable claims
Notes:
The Equitable Clean Up Doctrine – if you invoke equity, can “clean-up” all legal issues that are “incidental” to the equitable issues
Right to a jury trial is preserved in cases involving both legal & equitable claims
Notes:
The Equitable Clean Up Doctrine – if you invoke equity, can “clean-up” all legal issues that are “incidental” to the equitable issues
Tags: Right to Jury
Quelle:
Quelle:
Galloway v. U.S.
P is crazy and was in Army during WWI – wants to prove was disabled by insanity from time was in Army through trial
H - Right to jury trial means that the jury is allowed to make a reasonable inference from facts proven in evidence – Π has large gaps in time which is too large of an inference for jury to make
H - Right to jury trial means that the jury is allowed to make a reasonable inference from facts proven in evidence – Π has large gaps in time which is too large of an inference for jury to make
Tags: JNOV, Right to Jury
Quelle:
Quelle:
Lavender v. Kurn
RR death in the night - gash in back of head. Could have been hit by mail hook on train, or killed by bum.
H - All evidence is circumstantial and consistent w/ 2 theories jury to decide – not up to court to determine which of explanations is more plausible, so cannot DV
H - All evidence is circumstantial and consistent w/ 2 theories jury to decide – not up to court to determine which of explanations is more plausible, so cannot DV
Tags: JNOV, Right to Jury
Quelle:
Quelle:
Guenther v. Armstrong Rubber
Π changing tire which exploded in face; Π thought it was one type of tire, yet the person who “rescued” the tire after explosion said was another type of tire which was defective
H - DV not proper in this case b/c no reason why jury should not be able to readily resolve the problem in dispute – whether evidence is authentic is a jury question. P could have just forgotten b/c trauma of evidence – not unreasonable for jurors to think that
H - DV not proper in this case b/c no reason why jury should not be able to readily resolve the problem in dispute – whether evidence is authentic is a jury question. P could have just forgotten b/c trauma of evidence – not unreasonable for jurors to think that
Tags: JNOV, Right to Jury
Quelle:
Quelle:
Tags: Right to Jury
Quelle:
Quelle:
Kartensatzinfo:
Autor: stgillian
Oberthema: Law
Thema: Civil Law
Schule / Uni: Tulane
Ort: New Orleans, LA
Veröffentlicht: 02.03.2010
Schlagwörter Karten:
Alle Karten (94)
Amend (4)
Answer (4)
Attorney Fees (1)
Class Action (4)
Default (1)
Discovery (8)
Diversity Jdx (2)
Impleader (4)
Interpleader (1)
Intervention (8)
Jdx (12)
JNOV (3)
Joinder (5)
PI (2)
Pleading (19)
Real Parties (1)
Right to Jury (6)
Sanctions (4)
Specificity (11)
Summary Judgment (8)
Topics (2)
TRO (2)
