Machnik v. Jewell et al

Filing 39

ORDER granting deft's 31 Motion to Strike Jury Demand, and the jury demand set forth in plft's 4 Amended Complaint is hereby stricken. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 12/21/17. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(emw)

Download PDF
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00104-MR-DLH PATRICIA BLOKER MACHNIK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. ) _______________________________ ) ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Strike Jury Demand. [Doc. 31]. The Defendant moves to strike the jury demand set forth in the Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. [Doc. 31]. The Plaintiff asserts claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2671-2680 (“FTCA”). Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 2402 provides that FTCA actions are to be tried without a jury. 28 U.S.C. § 2402; Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14, 22 (1980) (“a plaintiff cannot opt for a jury in a FTCA action”). IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Strike Jury Demand [Doc. 31] is GRANTED, and the jury demand set forth in the Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [Doc. 4] is hereby STRICKEN. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed: December 21, 2017 2

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?