Modern US History & Law - Right to a Jury

[Kit]

OK I swear I was not looking for this but I find it interesting.  Happened (during a gear search of all things) upon a legal case order written last April where gun mfg's were/are (haven't followed up) being sued by the City of New York as a public nuisance.  NYC was trying to deny a jury trial.  It's interesting reading if you like this stuff; law's a big interest of mine and relates to my fields of study.  
 
 The link below takes you to a HTML version instead of the .pdf  (hate those .pdf's).
 
 Most interesting were the last two paragraphs written by the judge in establishing his order denying the NYC request.
 
 http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:EfX_rvA3FcgJ:www.nyed.uscourts.gov/00cv3641moj4804.pdf
 
 EXCERPT - in these two paragraphs the judge refers to the NYC argument *smile* as Rip Van Winkle   (beginning page 8, ends on page 9):
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 ...
 Of more than passing interest in guiding decision on the issue in the current case is the fact that the plaintiff in the NAACP gun case was a private party. Here, one of the world's great cities is challenging the international handgun industry's practices that are alleged to put at unnecessary risk millions of urban residents. The precedential value and impact of such a case is likely to be substantial. A jury is likely to enhance the sense of parties and public that justice has been served – providing the litigation with greater moral as well as legal force. No suggestion has been offered that a jury representative of the citizens of this district would be unqualified to fairly try the issues.
 
 Whether a 1791 chancellor awakened from a Rip Van Winkle over two-hundred-year nap would have utilized any particular form of jury in managing the present case in our current legal system and culture – so different from the one he knew -- is necessarily somewhat speculative. Speculation yielding to practicality, the following procedure seems best designed to protect the rights of all parties to a fair, affordable and prompt resolution: A Seventh Amendment jury will be empaneled to try the case.
 It will be conducted using evidentiary and procedural norms as in a law case. On appeal, if the appellate court desires findings of fact and law by the bench, the trial court can readily prepare them on remand. With these precautions, a new trial merely on the ground of mischaracterization of the case as legal or equitable seems unlikely.
 
 The motion to strike the defendants' jury demand is denied.
 
 SO ORDERED.
 
 
 Jack B. Weinstein
 Senior United States District Judge
 
 
 Dated: Brooklyn, N.Y.
 April 8, 2004
 -------------------------------------------------------