420 F.Supp. 99 (1976)
Plaintiff, takeover company, and defendants, former shareholders of company taken over by plaintiff, were involved in complex securities fraud litigation. Defendants filed a motion to strike plaintiff's jury demand. The court granted the motion, holding that the court was more capable of fairly deciding the facts than a jury.
- Complex accounting and proof questions existed and the scope of the problems presented was immense.
- These facts led the court to believe a jury would not be a rational and capable fact finder, and would not be a fair cross section of the community because the trial was estimated to last four to six months.
- The court had the ability to hear and review the evidence in an efficient and effective manner.
- Therefore, the court found there was no conflict with any statutory policy favoring trial by jury under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1861, or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court granted defendants' motion to strike plaintiff's jury demand, holding that a jury would not be a capable and rational fact finder, the court was able to efficiently and effectively hear the evidence, and there was no conflict with any statutory policy favoring a trial by jury.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.