Legal Opinion

Bereslavsky v. Caffey

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided May 7, 1947No. 20618PublishedCited by 68 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

The judge erred in striking the jury demand, despite the fact that more than ten days had elapsed from the service of the last pleading directed to the issues as made by the original complaint and amended answer. For, under that complaint, the plaintiff was not entitled to de.mand a jury, since the relief he then sought was exclusively “in equity,” so that there was then no “issue triable of right by a jury.” When, by amending his complaint, he abandoned his prayer for such “equitable” relief, he then, for the first tim.e, was in a position to demand a jury, for only then…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ex Parte PetersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  2. Ex Parte Republic of PeruSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Ettelson v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. United States Alkali Export Ass'n v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  5. Clark v. WoosterSupreme Court of the United States · 1886

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by68 opinions

  1. Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. WestoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Ford Motor Co. v. Ryan. Ferguson v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1950
  3. Stainback v. Mo Hock Ke Lok PoSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. In Re Innotron DiagnosticsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
  5. Ring v. SpinaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948

63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API