Racine v. Sebelius
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Plaintiff's Rule 39(b) 17 Motion for a Jury Trial is DENIED. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 5/2/2011. (SLR, )
' .... -t j
2011 flRY 3 Af'l 8 08
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURIY -:-_ _ _~_
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
GREAT FALLS DIVISION
LISA A. RACINE,
SECRETARY OF THE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HlJMAN SERVICES,
Plaintiff, Lisa A. Racine, brought this action against Defendant, Kathleen
Sebelius, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human
Services, for damages under Title Vll ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.c.
§§ 2000e et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA),
29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq. Answer was filed on December 20,2010. On April 8,
2011, Plaintiff filed a Motion for a Jury Trial under Fed. R. Civ. P. 39(b). The
motion is opposed.
No right to a jury trial exists for the ADEA claim. Lehman v. Nakshian,
453 U.S. 156, 162-69 (1981). The jury demand for the Title VII claim is not
timelyl and the Court many not appropriately exercise its discretion to extend the
time period for making the demand. Craiji v. Atlantic Richfield Company, 19 FJd
472,477 (9 th Cir. 1994); Russ v. Standard Insurance Company, 120 F.3d 988, 989
(9th Cir. 1997); Bell v. Cameron Meadows Land Company, 669 F.2d 1278, 1285
(9th Cir. 1982).
Plaintiffs Rule 39(b) Motion for a Jury Trial 2 is DENIED.
S ~:!~~lY of May, 2011.
United States District Judge
I Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b) provides, in pertinent part, that "[o]n any issue triable of right by a
jury, a party may demand a jury trial by: (l) serving the other parties with a written demand
which may be included in a pleading - no later than 14 days after the last pleading directed to the
issue is served ..." Rule 38(d) provides, in pertinent part, that "[a] party waives ajurytrial
unless its demand is properly served and filed."
Document No. 17
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?