Seventh Amendment (Right To Jury Trial)

447 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Burnett v. The Coleman Co.
  507 F.2d 726· 6th Cir.· 1974-12-10 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's order of remittitur, finding it was not an abuse of discretion, but remanded to offer plaintiffs the choice of accepting the reduced award or a new trial.
• Gore v. Am. Motorists Ins. Co.
  441 F.2d 10· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that plaintiffs' claim that Louisiana's appellate review of civil cases violated their Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Ammesmaki v. The Interlake S.S. Co.
  342 F.2d 627· 7th Cir.· 1965-02-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's disparate verdicts were permissible because the bases of liability for the seaman's injury and for indemnity were not identical, and the jury was entitled to find concurrent negligence. The court also held that the jury instructions regarding indemn
• City Messenger OF Hollywood, Inc. v. City Bonded Messenger Serv., Inc.
  254 F.2d 531· 7th Cir.· 1958-01-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding treble damages and attorney fees on state law claims and that a claim for services rendered was improperly introduced. The court reversed the judgment on all counts and remanded for a new trial.
• Control Ctr., L.L.C. v. Lauer
  288 B.R. 269· M.D. Fla.· 2002-12-11 ·cited 3×
  The court granted the motion to withdraw reference and transfer the case to the district court because several claims were non-core and the defendant had a right to a jury trial on those claims.
• Growers Packing Co. v. Cmty. Bank of Homestead
  134 B.R. 438· S.D. Fla.· 1991-07-30 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Seventh Amendment guarantees a jury trial for preference claims seeking monetary relief, and that bankruptcy courts lack statutory authority to conduct jury trials for such claims.
• In re Hooker Invs., Inc. v. Hooker Invs., Inc.
  937 F.2d 833· 2d Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 3×
  The court dismissed the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction, treating it as a petition for writ of mandamus, and denied the relief sought.
• Roth v. Iacovelli (In Re Southeast Connectors
  113 B.R. 85· S.D. Fla.· 1990-04-06 ·cited 3×
  The court held that an action to recover fraudulently transferred real property is an action at law, entitling the defendant to a jury trial.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Solow
  554 F. Supp. 2d 1356· S.D. Fla.· 2008-05-14 ·cited 2×
  The court granted the SEC's motion for remedies, permanently enjoining the defendant from violating securities laws, ordering disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and imposing a civil penalty.
• Whitehead Ex Rel. Whitehead v. Sch. Bd. for Hillsborough Cnty.
  918 F. Supp. 1515· M.D. Fla.· 1996-03-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that compensatory and punitive damages are not available under the IDEA, but are available under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act for intentional discrimination and retaliatory conduct. The court also held that a jury trial is constitutionally mandated for Sec
• Buckley v. Barlow
  997 F.2d 494· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the inmate's claims failed to state a constitutional violation actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Sasser v. The Adm'r
  990 F.2d 127· 4th Cir.· 1993-03-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the EPA Administrator had subject matter jurisdiction to assess Class II penalties for continuing violations of the Clean Water Act, and that the Seventh Amendment does not entitle a party to a jury trial in such administrative proceedings.
• Bhd. Shipping Co., Ltd. v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. & City of Milwaukee
  985 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding the city's negligence.
• Travellers Int'l AG. v. Robinson
  982 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1992-12-28 ·cited 2×
  A creditor who files a proof of claim against a bankruptcy estate, even if contingent, waives its Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial in an adversary proceeding concerning that claim.
• In re Hale v. Carlson
  980 F.2d 1176· 8th Cir.· 1992-12-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court did not err in denying the appellants' motions for recusal and for a stay of proceedings, as the appellants failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion or a compelling reason to infringe upon their Fifth and Seventh Amendment rights.
• In re Grabill Corp.
  976 F.2d 1126· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-23 ·cited 2×
  Bankruptcy judges are unauthorized to conduct jury trials because Congress has not conferred such authority.
• Wilson v. Belmont Homes, Inc.
  970 F.2d 53· 5th Cir.· 1992-08-28 ·cited 2×
  The Seventh Amendment does not guarantee a jury trial for Title VII claims, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991 does not apply retroactively to cases tried before its enactment.
• Kirk v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co.
  942 F.2d 504· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-19 ·cited 2×
  The dissent argues that the insured's illness did not manifest with sufficient symptoms for a reasonable diagnosis until after the policy's inception, thus it should be covered.
• Oostendorp v. Trilok S. Khanna
  937 F.2d 1177· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by requiring deposition summaries and by admitting certain evidence, nor did it err in imposing sanctions on plaintiff's counsel.
• United States v. Inslaw, Inc.
  932 F.2d 1467· D.C. Cir.· 1991-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The Court held that the automatic stay under § 362(a) does not apply to a party in possession of property under a claim of right at the time of bankruptcy filing, even if that possession may ultimately prove to violate the bankrupt's rights.
• Smith v. Tidewater Marine Towing, Inc.
  927 F.2d 838· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of the plaintiff's felony conviction was proper impeachment, the jury's interrogatory answers were reconcilable, and the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, thus affirming the trial court's judgment.
• Daniel Int'l Corp. v. Fischbach & Moore, Inc.
  916 F.2d 1061· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by striking the jury demand, and that the contractually stipulated profit margin was a valid liquidation of damages, not a penalty.
• Mitchell v. Consol. Freightways Corp. of Del.
  747 F. Supp. 1446· M.D. Fla.· 1990-09-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that punitive damages are not available under Fla.Stat. § 61.1301(2)(j)(2) because the statute enumerates specific remedies and does not include punitive damages. The court also held that a jury trial is available for claims under this statute, as the remedy sought
• Henson v. Sgt. T.S. Falls
  912 F.2d 977· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the magistrate made improper credibility determinations and misapplied the standard for a directed verdict, thus denying the plaintiff his right to a jury trial.
• In re Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Frates
  911 F.2d 380· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that section 158(d) of title 28 of the U.S. Code is the exclusive basis for appellate jurisdiction in bankruptcy cases, precluding interlocutory appeals under section 1292(b). However, the court granted a writ of mandamus, finding that bankruptcy judges lack the st
• Averbach v. Rival Mfg. Co.
  879 F.2d 1196· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was a sufficient basis for the jury to infer reliance on the defendant's false interrogatory answers, reversing the judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Leach v. PAN Am. World Airways
  842 F.2d 285· 11th Cir.· 1988-04-12 ·cited 2×
  Employees suing a union for breach of the duty of fair representation are not entitled to a jury trial because such claims are equitable in nature and intertwined with claims against the employer that seek equitable relief.
• Fletcher v. McCREARY Tire & Rubber Co.
  773 F.2d 666· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a trial court did not err in proceeding with an eleven-member jury when the parties had waived alternate jurors and the plaintiff refused an offer to select a new twelve-member panel.
• Horizon Creditcorp v. OIL Screw "Innovation I"
  730 F.2d 1389· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that appellants were entitled to a jury trial on the issue of damages, even after a separate trial on liability, because the court's jurisdiction was based on diversity.
• Blackburn v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  681 F.2d 461· 6th Cir.· 1982-06-23 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the Tax Court's judgment, finding no merit to the petitioner's claims of an unfair trial or unconstitutional denial of a jury trial, and that the Tax Court's findings were not clearly erroneous.
• Beneficial Life Ins. Co. v. Knobelauch
  653 F.2d 393· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-10 ·cited 2×
  A contract provision requiring repayment of advances only if the employee works for a competitor after termination is void under California Business and Professions Code § 16600, as it restrains the employee from engaging in a lawful business.
• United States v. McMAHAN
  556 F.2d 362· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a taxpayer is not entitled to a jury trial to determine if they are a responsible officer for unpaid withholding taxes when the government also seeks to set aside a fraudulent conveyance in the same action. The court also found sufficient evidence to support t
• Floyd S. Pike Elec. Contractor, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n
  557 F.2d 1045· 4th Cir.· 1977-06-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the case must be remanded for reconsideration in light of a subsequent Commission decision regarding imputation of supervisor's acts to the employer.
• Adams Mach. & Tool Co., Inc. v. MFB Mut. Ins. Co.
  479 F.2d 439· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that submitting the issue of whether the sprinkler system was cut off to the jury was an error that was not harmless, requiring a new trial on liability. However, errors regarding damages were harmless.
• Landon v. Nat'l Bldg. Corp.
  415 F.2d 860· 6th Cir.· 1969-10-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in removing General Motors from the case and in distributing the jury's allocation of fault for 'other causes,' violating the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial.
• The Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Barnaby
  414 F.2d 309· 6th Cir.· 1969-07-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury's finding that the defendant truck driver's negligence was not a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries was not against the great weight of the evidence and that no reversible error occurred in other rulings.
• Elliott v. Watkins Trucking Co., Inc.
  406 F.2d 90· 7th Cir.· 1969-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court properly entered judgment notwithstanding the verdict due to the jury's inconsistent answers to interrogatories and general verdict, and that the psychologist's testimony was admissible.
• Ross v. Bernhard
  403 F.2d 909· 2d Cir.· 1968-11-01 ·cited 2×
  The Seventh Amendment's guarantee of a jury trial does not extend to stockholders' derivative actions, as these actions have historically been considered equitable in nature.
• Great Am. Ins. Co. v. The United States
  397 F.2d 289· Ct. Cl.· 1968-06-14 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge would have granted the motion to dismiss, finding the Bank's claim to the check proceeds distinct from the surety's claim to contract funds.
• Hardware Mut. Cas. Co. v. Bewayne Jones
  363 F.2d 627· 4th Cir.· 1966-06-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury's findings on permission and use of the vehicle were supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in its instructions or in denying a directed verdict.
• Bradley Mining Co. v. Boice
  205 F.2d 937· 9th Cir.· 1953-06-24 ·cited 2×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing en banc, adhering to its original decision.
• Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thompson
  171 F.2d 723· 5th Cir.· 1948-12-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's finding that the appellee's disability was caused by an accidental injury, not merely an occupational disease.
• Carnahan v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  2020 WL 1166721· S.D. Fla.· 2025-11-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Second Amended Complaint should be dismissed with prejudice because it constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading and fails to establish subject matter jurisdiction for claims against the SEC, and the Bivens claims against individual defendants are unav
• Leftwich v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP
  396 So. 3d 603· Fla. 5th DCA· 2024-05-24 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment was properly granted because the evidence, viewed in light most favorable to the non-moving party, would not allow a reasonable jury to find that the dangerous condition existed for a length of time sufficient to establish constructive notice under § 768.0755. Al
• Johnston-Gebre v. IH4 Prop. Fla., L.P
  2014 WL 12619888· S.D. Fla.· 2023-10-02 ·cited 1×
  A contractual jury trial waiver is enforceable against a signatory if knowing and voluntary, but not against a non-signatory minor child who did not bring claims under the contract.
• Frados v. Cont'l Cas. Co.
  363 F. Supp. 2d 1349· S.D. Fla.· 2005-02-02 ·cited 1×
  The court held that plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial under ERISA and that defendant did not abuse its discretion in terminating disability benefits.
• Nat'l Satellite Sports, Inc. v. No Frills Rest., Inc.
  15 F. Supp. 2d 1360· S.D. Fla.· 1998-08-06 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Seventh Amendment entitles defendants to a jury trial for statutory damages under the Cable Communications Policy Act, as the cause of action is analogous to common law property rights and the remedy is legal in nature.
• Crispin Calderon v. Witvoet
  999 F.2d 1101· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-16 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the definition of 'transporting' in the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (AWPA) should be interpreted narrowly within the context of farm labor contracting activities, and that the family farm exemption requires proof that all such activ
• Lenaghan v. Pepsico, Inc.
  961 F.2d 1250· 6th Cir.· 1992-04-20 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a district court abused its discretion by refusing to grant relief from a judgment entered due to a late rejection of a mediation panel's evaluation, where the delay resulted from an excusable misreading of an ambiguous local rule and caused no prejudice to th
• Davita M. Key v. Dynamic Sec., Inc.
  11th Cir.· 2026-08-05
  The district court erred by presuming at summary judgment that Key received the EEOC right-to-sue letter within three days of mailing without allowing the jury to resolve the factual dispute, as Key presented sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption. The district court abused