# Cockrell v. St. Clair County

> District Court, S.D. Illinois · October 14, 2021

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10154280

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, S.D. Illinois
- **Decided:** October 14, 2021
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10154280

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EDWIN L. COCKRELL, SR., and )
CHERYL MATHEWS, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
vs. ) Case No. 21-cv-907-DWD
)
ST. CLAIR COUNTY, )
THOMAS HOLBROOK, and )
MARK A. KERN, )
)
Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

DUGAN, District Judge:

Plaintiffs Edwin L. Cockrell, Sr. and Cheryl Mathews challenge the
constitutionality of the apportionment of county board districts in St. Clair County,
Illinois. On August 11, 2021, they filed suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, alleging that the redistricting plan violates
55 ILCS, 5/2-3003, et seq., and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. On
September 3, 2021, Defendants made a demand for “trial by jury on all claims and issues
so triable.” (Doc. 14). By motion dated September 14, 2021, Plaintiffs seek to strike
Defendants’ jury demand.
In support of their motion, Plaintiffs cite no case law or rule precluding a trial by
jury on their claims and state briefly and conclusively that the “complained of cause is
not one for which a jury trial is allowed” and that there are no “decisions allowing a jury
trial for reapportionment proceedings.” (Doc. 21). Defendants’ response points out that
the issue of jury trial demands in declaratory judgment acts are governed by Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure 38 and 39, which preserve the right to a trial by jury on any issue
so triable. See FED. R. Civ. P. 57, 38, 39. It is well-settled that if issues in an action would
have been triable by a jury had something other than declaratory relief been sought, then
a right to a jury trial exists. See Simler v. Conner, 372 U.S. 221 (1963); Beacon Theatres, Inc.
v. Westover, 359 U.S. 500 (1959).
Here, Plaintiff’s claims may or may not be triable by a jury, but it is not for the
Court to delve into whether the issues in this case are triable by jury without a detailed
memorandum of law and a fully developed argument from Plaintiffs. As such, the
motion to strike jury demand is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiffs may resubmit
their arguments in a more detailed manner if they so desire.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 13, 2021
(Du i
DAVIDW.DUGAN
United States District Judge

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10154280. Public record. Not legal advice.