- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
As i understand it (read: i watched Leonard French) Meyer has requested a jury trial but the judge may simply make a ruling on their own before it reaches that point.
Either party has the right to demand a jury trial on any material factual issues in dispute. There may not be any factual issues requiring a jury, though.
This is a case under Texas law, although it is being litigated in federal court under diversity jurisdiction. The most likely defense Waid has unless he is actually going to deny, in the face of his own repeated admissions, that he called Antarctic and repeatedly publicly discussed exactly what he did both before and after the fact, is that his actions were justified and he was acting in good faith.
That's a mixed issue of fact and law, because there's the issue of whether he actually believed his actions were justified (relevant to the punitive damages issue among other things), and a legal issue of whether his actions actually were justified. At least part of this requires a factual finding material to the claims, and would tend to preclude a summary judgment bypassing jury trial unless the parties stipulated to it.
So in short, a party is constitutionally entitled to a jury determination of facts, and I think either party, if they wanted to, could frame this issue as factual in nature, for at least some part of the case.
I think there may be a partial summary judgment on undisputed facts, such as that the phone call in question did occur and that Waid did in fact make public statements before, during and after the events in question.