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.
