Legal Opinion

Winchester Industries, Inc. v. Sentry Insurance

District Court, D. Connecticut

Decided June 29, 2009No. Civil 3:06cv858 (JBA)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RULING ON MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ JURY DEMAND

JANET BOND ARTERTON, District Judge.

Defendant Sentry Insurance (“Sentry”) moves to strike the jury demand asserted by Plaintiffs Winchester Industries, Inc. (“Winchester”) and John Devanney on the grounds that is untimely under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38. As explained below, because the Court concludes that exercising its Rule 39(b) discretion to grant a jury trial is warranted under the circumstances of this case, Sentry’s motion is denied.

I. Background

Plaintiffs filed a two-count amended complaint on June 2, 2007, naming two…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,959 Frank Lanza, Jr. v. Drexel & Co., Theodore J. Kircher and Christie F. VitoloCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
  2. Winifred D. Noonan v. Cunard Steamship Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
  3. Rosen v. DickCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
  4. Bogosian v. Woloohojian Realty Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2003
  5. McCarthy v. BronsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Krishmar-Junker v. Kingline Equipment, Inc.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 2025
  2. Lewis v. ErfeDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2020
  3. NCR Corporation v. B.A.T. Industries P.L.C.District Court, S.D. New York · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API