Bell v. Fishing Company of Alaska et al

Filing 53

ORDER denying 49 Motion for Jury Trial, by Judge Ricardo S Martinez.(VP)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER - 1 This matter is before the court for consideration of plaintiff's motion for a jury trial, Dkt. # 49. Plaintiff Michael Bell filed this complaint pursuant to the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688, seeking damages for injuries he received while working in defendant's employ. This Court's earlier ruling granting partial summary judgment to defendant was reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the case was remanded for trial. Plaintiff now requests that the matter be tried to a jury, asserting that he should not be bound by former counsel's choice of a bench trial. Plaintiff also suggests that "having granted summary judgment on the facts as a matter of law, even if reversed, the likelihood would be that the court would find the same as a matter of fact." Plaintiff's Motion, Dkt. # 49, ¶ 2. Defendant has opposed the motion. The Court finds no basis in plaintiff's motion to excuse the requirement that a jury demand be v. FISHING COMPANY OF ALASKA, et al., Defendants. MICHAEL BELL, Plaintiff, CASE NO. C06-195RSM ORDER ON MOTION FOR A JURY TRIAL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

filed "no later than 10 days after the last pleading directed to the issue is served." F.R.Civ. Proc. 38(b)(1). Nor is there any basis for plaintiff's fear that the Court cannot give proper weight and

consideration to the evidence as it shall be presented at trial. Plaintiff's untimely motion for a jury trial is accordingly DENIED. DATED this 4th day of March 2009.

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER - 2