Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
10. Is the court likely to rule that the landlord is entitled to a jury trial?
A landlord, a citizen of State A, sued a State B corporation in a one-count complaint filed in the federal district court in State B. The complaint alleged that the State B corporation breached its lease with the landlord. The landlord demanded a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment and asked the court for a writ of ejectment. The corporation argued that the landlord is not entitled to a jury trial.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Before the merger of law and equity, it was usually simple to determine whether a cause of action was at common law for purposes of the Seventh Amendment. United States v. Wonson (1812) established the historical test, which relies on English common law to determine whether the right to a jury trial in a civil suit is necessary.
Also, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 38(a) provides that the right to a trial by jury as declared in the Seventh Amendment is preserved by the party who demands it. However, a party who wishes for a jury trial on a particular issue must file a demand within 14 days after the service of the last pleading directed to that issue.
A is correct. A writ of ejectment is a common law term for a civil action to recover the possession of or title to land. It replaced the older real property actions and the various possessory assizes (denoting county-based pleas to local sittings of the courts) where boundary disputes often occurred.
Though still used in some places, the term is now obsolete in many common law jurisdictions where possession and title are now actionable through the use of eviction (also called possession proceedings) and quiet title (or injunctive and/or declaratory relief), respectively. Even though ejectment does not seek monetary damages, it was historically a writ at common law and hence triggers the Seventh Amendment's jury guarantee.
B is incorrect. This answer choice states the correct conclusion with incorrect legal reasoning. The FRCP eliminated the distinction between law and equity for many purposes (for instance, for purposes of pleading) but not for purposes of the Seventh Amendment.
C is incorrect. As explained above, ejectment was a cause of action «at common law» as defined by the historical test in Wonson.
D is incorrect. This is an incorrect statement of law. The Seventh Amendment applies only to suits at common law, which specifically excludes equitable claims.