Issue: Does a plaintiff have to waive its seventh amendment jury trial right when it was agreed to in a fraudulent contract?
| Area of Law: | Business Organizations & Contracts, Litigation & Procedure |
| Keywords: | Jury trial right; Waiver; Fraudulent contract |
| Jurisdiction: | Federal |
| Cited Cases: | 372 U.S. 221; 359 U.S. 500; 115 F.3d 585 |
| Cited Statutes: | None |
| Date: | 03/01/2001 |
It has long been settled that "[t]he federal policy favoring jury trials is of historic and continuing strength." Simler v. Conner, 372 U.S. 221, 222 (1963). Moreover, as the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently observed, "'[m]aintenance of the jury as a fact-finding body is of such importance and occupies so firm a place in our history and jurisprudence that any seeming curtailment of the right to a jury trial should be scrutinized with the utmost care.’" Kampa v. White Consol. Indus., Inc, 115 F.3d 585, 586 (8th Cir. 1997) (citing Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. Westover, 359 U.S. 500, 501 (1959) (quoting Dimick v. Schiedt, 293 U.S. 474, 486 (1935))).
It has long been clear that the tort claim for fraud exists independent of any claim brought on a contract.
Telum, Inc. v. E.F. Hutton Credit Corp., 859 F.2d 835 (10th Cir. 1988), argues that the waiver clause should apply to pre-Lease events. However, Telum is inapposite. The Telum case was an action to rescind an oil drilling rig lease and personal guaranties based on alleged breach of contract and fraud. The plaintiff relied on general allegations of fraud relating to the master lease agreement as the basis for its rescission claim. See id. at 837. Moreover, the Telum plaintiff never asserted his right to a jury until after the defendants had counterclaimed. Id. At bottom, Telum stands only for the proposition that jury waiver clauses are enforceable as to claims […]