Florida Appellate Rules Should Allow for Interlocutory Appeal of Decisions to Deny Jury Trial

A legal firm is a company that provides legal services like advising, representing clients in court, and drafting legal documents. An attorney is a lawyer who works for a legal firm. The right to a trial by jury is protected by the U.S. and Florida constitutions, but in some cases, courts have denied this right to parties. In the past, Florida appellate courts would allow parties to challenge these denials with a special petition called common law certiorari. This allowed for a quick review of the decision before the case went to trial. However, in 1998, the Florida Supreme Court removed this protection, stating that parties would have to wait until after the trial to appeal the denial of a jury trial. This decision was seen as a departure from the essential requirements of the law, as the right to a trial by jury is fundamental. It was believed that denying this right was more than a violation of the constitution; it was a denial of a fundamental right that has been recognized for a long time. It is argued that the Florida Supreme Court made a mistake when it decided to remove this protection and that the law in Florida should allow for immediate review of a trial court’s decision to deny a right to a jury trial. The Florida Supreme Court in the case of Jaye ruled that they will not review a lower court’s decision to not allow a petition for a trial by jury. They said that the person who was denied a jury trial did not suffer irreparable harm and that the decision could be appealed later. They also mentioned that the petition for the trial by jury should only be used in rare occasions and should not be used to get around the rule for appealing non-final orders. This decision goes against the opinions of other district courts. In this case, the court didn’t consider whether the trial court made a mistake by not allowing Jaye to have a jury trial. Instead, the court focused on whether Jaye was irreparably harmed by the trial court’s decision. The court said that showing their evidence early, the age of the people involved, and the cost of having a trial again weren’t enough to prove irreparable harm. This decision goes against what other courts have said, and it seems like the Supreme Court made this decision without any good reason. The Supreme Court said it’s not a big deal to have to show your trial strategy in a bench trial, but some people think it is a big deal. Also, making someone go through a bench trial when the law says they should have a jury trial is a waste of money and time for everyone. They should be able to appeal that decision right away to save money for everyone involved. In a legal case, if there are both fairness claims and law claims, a bench trial could end up taking away the law claims depending on the court’s decisions. This could seriously harm a party in the case. The court might have made a different decision if they had thought about the constitutional rights protected by the common law certiorari before getting rid of it for the right to a jury trial. Since this decision is now the law, the only way to change it is to amend the appellate rules to allow for interlocutory appeal. This means allowing certain nonfinal orders to be appealed before the final decision. In 1977, the court changed a rule about when you can appeal a court decision. Back then, you could appeal some decisions that weren’t final, like ones about where the trial should be or if the court had the power to make someone go to trial. But now, there are even more nonfinal decisions you can appeal. However, the rules still don’t let you appeal a decision that takes away your right to have a jury trial before the trial is finished. This is a problem, and the court should change the rules to allow people to appeal those decisions too. Rule 9.130 allows for immediate appeals of certain nonfinal orders, but it does not protect the right to trial by jury, which is an important right. The Florida Supreme Court should change the rule to allow parties to appeal nonfinal orders that determine the right to a jury trial. This is important because both the Florida and U.S. constitutions protect the right to a jury trial in civil cases. In a case called Hobbs v. Florida First National Bank of Jacksonville, the court said that denying someone the right to a trial by jury when they should have one is against the law. This is protected by the Florida Constitution. Another case, Hollywood, Inc. v. City of Hollywood, also talked about the right to a trial by jury. It’s important because it’s in the U.S. Constitution and the Florida Constitution. Overall, the right to a trial by jury is a big deal in the legal system. In the case of Sarasota-Manatee Airport Authority v. Alderman, the court decided that a certain type of legal action could be used to make sure that a jury could decide on certain issues in a trial. However, a later case, Jaye, seemed to suggest that the earlier decision was no longer valid. This created confusion about whether the first type of legal action could still be used. The court did not explain why this change happened, and people were left wondering about the best way to challenge a decision that denied their right to a jury trial. These are court cases in Florida where people asked for a higher court to review decisions made by lower courts. They claimed that their rights were being violated, like freedom of speech or due process. The higher court decided whether or not to review the cases.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/florida-appellate-rules-should-allow-for-interlocutory-appeal-of-decisions-to-deny-jury-trial/