Opinion
Suit by Violet M. Nelson against the American National Bank & Trust Company and others in the initial pleadings in the state court, plaintiff made a demand for a trial by jury and the defendant after removal moved to strike the demand for a jury trial.
The District Court, Leslie R. Darr, C. J., held that no demand for a jury trial had been made since removal which was necessary and that the defendant's motion would be treated as a motion to strike the case from the jury calendar.
Motion to strike case from jury calendar allowed.
Atchley & Atchley, Chattanooga, Tenn., for plaintiff.
Frazier, Roberts & Weill, Chattanooga, Tenn., for defendants.
DARR, Chief Judge.
This suit originated in a state equity court. In the initial pleadings in that court the plaintiff made demand for a trial by a jury. Now comes the defendant, American Mutual Liability Insurance Company, and moves to strike the demand for a jury.
The demand for a jury trial in the state court has no legal effect here. No demand for a jury trial has been made since the removal, which is necessary under Rule 81(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Ferris v. Farnsworth Television & Radio Corp., D.C., 8 F.R.D. 489.
The defendant's motion will be treated as a motion to strike the case from the jury calendar and is allowed.
If appropriate issues are presented under which the plaintiff would be entitled as a matter of right to a jury trial, except for the absence of an appropriate demand for a jury, and said issues are accompanied by a request for a jury trial, consideration will be given the application.
Order accordingly.