Opinion

United States v. Dish Network, L.L.C.

  • 754 F. Supp. 2d 1002
  • 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130137
  • 2010 WL 4986335
Court
District Court, C.D. Illinois
Filed
Dec 9, 2010
Status
Published
Author
Cudmore
On the bench
Byron G. Cudmore
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 44.2%

The opinion

OPINION

BYRON G. CUDMORE, Unites States Magistrate Judge:

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Dish Network L.L.C.’s (Dish) Motion to Strike Jury Demand (d/e 54) (Motion). Plaintiff United States of America (Government) seeks equitable relief under §§ 13(b) and 19 of the Federal Commission Act (FTC Act) and civil penalties under § 5(m)(1)(A) of the FTC Act.

First Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial (d/e 5)

¶¶ 94, 95; 15 U.S.C. §§ 45 (m)(l)(A), 53(b), 57b. The Government demands a jury trial on the issue of liability on its civil penalties claim. The Government does not demand a jury trial on any other claims or issues, and the State Plaintiffs do not demand a jury trial on any claims or issues.

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Jury Demand (d/e 60),

at 1. Dish moves to strike the jury trial demand. The Motion is denied because the Government has a right to a jury trial.

An action for civil penalties is an action at law for which the Seventh Amendment guarantees a right to a jury trial to determine liability.

Tull v. United States,

481 U.S. 412, 427 , 107 S.Ct. 1831 , 95 L.Ed.2d 365 (1987). The amount of civil penalties to be imposed is an issue for the Court, as well as the FTC’s equitable claims under §§ 13(b) and 19.

Id.; see FTC v. World Travel Vacation Brokers, Inc.,

861 F.2d 1020, 1027-28 (7th Cir.1988);

FTC v. H.N. Singer, Inc.,

668 F.2d 1107, 1110-12 (9th Cir.1982). When, as here, “a ‘legal claim is joined with an equitable claim, the right to a jury trial on the legal claim, including all issues common to both claims, remains intact.’ ”

Tull,

481 U.S. at 425 , 107 S.Ct. 1831 (quoting

Curtis v. Loether,

415 U.S. 189 , 196 n. 11, 94 S.Ct. 1005 , 39 L.Ed.2d 260 (1974)). Thus, the Government is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of liability for civil penalties under FTC Act § 5(m)(l)(A).

Dish relies on numerous cases in which the FTC only sought equitable relief under FTC Act §§ 13(b) and 19.

See Defendant’s Memorandum in Support of Its Motion to Strike Jury Demand (d/e 55),

at 5-9. Those cases do not apply because the FTC did not seek civil penalties.

Dish cites the Seventh Circuit’s decision in

Medtronic, Inc. v. Intermedies, Inc.,

for the proposition that a case that sought both legal and equitable relief in eighteenth century England could have only been brought in a court of equity.

Medtronic, Inc.,

725 F.2d 440, 442 (7th Cir.1984). The

Medtronic

Court was address

*1004

ing whether a party could appeal the denial of a stay, not whether a party had a Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury. The Supreme Court makes it clear that the right to a jury trial exists in actions for civil penalties, and the right to a jury trial remains intact even though legal and equitable claims are joined in the same action.

Tull,

481 U.S. at 425, 427 , 107 S.Ct. 1831 . The Government, therefore, has a right to demand a jury trial on the issue of liability on its claim for civil penalties. The Motion is denied.

THEREFORE, Defendant Dish Network L.L.C.’s Motion to Strike Jury Demand (d/e 54) is DENIED. Plaintiff United States of America is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of liability on its claim for civil penalties under FTC Act § 5(m)(l)(A).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.