Fellah v. City University of New York
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-06423
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Fellah v. City University of New York, Judge Cronan ruled Fellah’s jury demand timely and granted his motion for a jury trial.
Tarik Fellah, whose request for a jury trial was granted; the defendants, whose responsive pleading had not yet been filed.
What happened
In Fellah v. City University of New York, Tarik Fellah asked the court to allow a jury trial. The defendants had removed the case from New York state court, but they had not yet filed an answer or another response to the complaint.
The court considered the federal rules governing jury demands in cases moved from state court. Because no responsive pleading had been filed, the court held that Fellah’s demand was timely under the general federal rule allowing a jury demand within 14 days after the last relevant pleading is served.
Judge Cronan granted Fellah’s motion for a jury trial. Because the demand was timely, the court did not decide whether it would have allowed a late demand.
The detailed version
- Fellah v. City University of New York · No. 1:20-cv-06423
- John Cronan
- Jan. 8, 2021
Background
Defendants removed this case from New York state court on August 13, 2020. They had not filed an answer to Tarik Fellah’s complaint. The court had allowed them to file a motion to dismiss, which was due January 20, 2021.
Fellah first sought a conference about filing a late jury demand. After the court denied that request but set a briefing schedule, Fellah, through newly retained counsel, filed a motion arguing that his jury demand was timely. Defendants took no position on whether the demand was timely.
Analysis
The court examined Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 81(c), which addresses jury demands in cases removed from state court. That rule did not resolve the issue because Fellah had not demanded a jury in state court, and defendants had not filed an answer or otherwise responded to the complaint before removal. The court also rejected Fellah’s argument that no post-removal demand was required because New York law does require an express jury demand.
The court therefore applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38. That rule generally permits a party to demand a jury trial no later than 14 days after the last pleading directed to the issue is served. Because defendants had not yet filed a responsive pleading, the court held that Fellah’s jury demand was timely.
Disposition
The court granted Fellah’s motion for a jury trial. Because the demand was timely, the court did not reach whether it would have ordered a jury trial despite an untimely demand. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at Docket Number 26.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.