Legal Opinion

Hamon Leasing, Inc. v. Continental Cars, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 28, 1978No. 77-92PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The legal issue presented here is whether plaintiff timely filed his request for trial by jury.

Plaintiff's initial complaint, filed October 28, 1975, contained no demand for jury. Defendant timely answered the complaint on November 26, 1975, and the parties subsequently engaged in limited discovery. On October 15, 1976, almost one year after the filing of the original complaint, the plaintiff filed an "Amended Complaint" and, for the first time, demanded a trial by jury. Defendant moved to strike the jury demand, alleging:

"Said jury demand was not filed within the time prescribed by Rule 38…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Swofford v. B & W, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1964
  2. Roth v. HyerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1944
  3. Connecticut General Life Insurance Company v. M. Patricia BreslinCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1964
  4. Clayton v. SimpsonCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1977

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Camelot Music, Inc. v. MARX REALTY & IMP. CO.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  2. Ex Parte Twintech Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1990
  3. Ole South Bldg. Supply Corp. v. PilgrimSupreme Court of Alabama · 1983
  4. Washington v. WaltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1982
  5. Ex Parte Reliance Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1980

5 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