California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Estate of Phelps, 223 Cal.App.3d 332, 273 Cal.Rptr. 2 (Cal. App. 1990):
Turning to the petition before it which it characterized as "conclusory," the court was unable to determine whether, in light of its discussion of the applicable law, the petition raised factual issues appropriate to a jury trial. The court noted that the proceeding "appear[ed] to have similarities to accounting actions, not appropriate for jury trial, and to dissolution proceedings for which juries are not traditionally permitted. This suggests that a trial by jury should not be had. Nonetheless, the decision should be made by the trial court after a proper presentation to it." (Heiser v. Superior Court, supra, 88 Cal.App.3d at p. 281, 151 Cal.Rptr. 745.)
Accordingly, while reversing the order granting the jury trial, the court did so without prejudice to granting a new order should further delineation of the issues warrant it. (Heiser v. Superior Court, supra, 88 Cal.App.3d at p. 282, 151 Cal.Rptr. 745.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.