A. Franklin

The plaintiff brought a motion to strike the jury notices in two motor vehicle accident actions that were to be tried together.

The actions had already been set down for trial, requiring the plaintiff to seek leave under Rule 48.04(1).

The court denied leave, finding no evidence to explain the delay in bringing the motion and that the 'interests of justice' test was not met.

The court further held that even if leave were granted, it would not strike the jury notices, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that justice would be better served by a judge-alone trial.

The motion was dismissed with costs awarded to the defendants.

The plaintiff brought a motion to strike the defendants' jury notice on a provisional basis, arguing that the backlog of civil jury trials caused by the COVID-19 pandemic would result in prejudicial delay.

The defendants opposed the motion, arguing that a jury was best positioned to assess liability, credibility, and medical evidence regarding the plaintiff's alleged traumatic brain injury.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that there were no available dates for either jury or non-jury trials in 2023, making it speculative whether a non-jury trial would proceed substantially sooner.