The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation - LightNovelsOnl.com
You're reading novel online at LightNovelsOnl.com. Please use the follow button to get notifications about your favorite novels and its latest chapters so you can come back anytime and won't miss anything.
[51] 325 U.S. 91, 94, 95.
[52] Ibid. 101.
[53] Ibid. 103.
[54] Ibid. 113, 135.
[55] Ibid. 154.
[56] 341 U.S. 97 (1951).
[57] _See also_ Koehler et al. _v._ United States, 342 U.S. 852 (1951).
[58] United States _v._ Petrillo, 332 U.S. 1 (1947).
[59] United States _v._ Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 125 (1941).
[60] Nash _v._ United States, 229 U.S. 373 (1913).
[61] United States _v._ Alford, 274 U.S. 264 (1927).
[62] United States _v._ Wurzbach, 280 U.S. 396 (1930).
[63] Gorin _v._ United States, 312 U.S. 19 (1941).
[64] Kay _v._ United States, 303 U.S. 1 (1938).
[65] United States _v._ Shreveport Grain & Elevator Co., 287 U.S. 77 (1932).
[66] United States _v._ Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 544, 558 (1876); United States _v._ Simmons, 96 U.S. 360 (1878); Bartell _v._ United States, 227 U.S. 427 (1913); Burton _v._ United States, 202 U.S. 344 (1906).
[67] Potter _v._ United States, 155 U.S. 438, 444 (1894).
[68] United States _v._ Carll, 105 U.S. 611 (1882).
[69] United States _v._ Cook, 17 Wall. 168, 174 (1872).
[70] Rosen _v._ United States, 161 U.S. 29, 40 (1896).
[71] United States _v._ Van Duzee, 140 U.S. 169, 173 (1891).
[72] Salinger _v._ United States, 272 U.S. 542, 548 (1926).
[73] Wilson _v._ United States, 221 U.S. 361 (1911).
[74] Kirby _v._ United States, 174 U.S. 47, 61 (1809); Robertson _v._ Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275, 282 (1897).
[75] Mattox _v._ United States, 156 U.S. 237, 240 (1895).
[76] Reynolds _v._ United States, 98 U.S. 145, 160 (1879).
[77] Motes _v._ United States, 178 U.S. 458 (1900).
[78] Kirby _v._ United States, 174 U.S. 47 (1899).
[79] Johnson _v._ Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 463 (1938).
[80] United States ex rel. Bilok.u.msky _v._ Tod, 263 U.S. 149 (1923).
[81] Gla.s.ser _v._ United States, 315 U.S. 60 (1942).
[82] United States _v._ Hayman, 342 U.S. 205 (1952).
[83] Adams _v._ United States, 317 U.S. 269 (1942).
[84] Walker _v._ Johnston, 312 U.S. 275 (1941); Von Moltke _v._ Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 (1948). _See also_ United States ex rel. McCann _v._ Adams, 320 U.S. 220 (1943).
AMENDMENT 7
CIVIL TRIALS
Page Trial by jury in civil cases 891 Origin and purpose of the amendment 891 Trial by jury, elements of, preserved 891 To what courts and cases applicable 892 Cases not governed by the amendment 893 Restrictive force of the amendment 894 Judge and jury 895 Line drawn by the common law 895 Directed verdicts 896 Waiver of right of trial by jury 897 Appeals from State courts to the Supreme Court 897
CIVIL TRIALS
Amendment 7
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Trial by Jury in Civil Cases
ORIGIN AND PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
Late in the Federal Convention it was moved that a clause be inserted in article III, section 2 of the draft Const.i.tution to read "* * * and a trial by jury shall be preserved as usual in civil cases." The proposal failed when it was pointed out that the make-up and powers of juries differed greatly in different States and that a uniform provision for all States was impossible.[1] The objection evidently antic.i.p.ated that in cases falling to their jurisdiction on account of the diversity of citizens.h.i.+p of the parties, the federal courts would conform their procedure to the laws of the several States.[2] The omission, however, raised an objection to the Const.i.tution which "was pressed with an urgency and zeal * * * well-nigh preventing its ratification."[3] Nor was the agitation a.s.suaged by Hamilton's suggestion in The Federalist that Congress would have ample power, in establis.h.i.+ng the lower federal courts and in making "exceptions" to the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction, to safeguard jury trial in civil cases according to the standards of the common law.[4] His argument bore fruit, nevertheless, in the Seventh Amendment, whereby, in the words of the Court, the right of trial by jury is preserved as it "existed under the English common law when the amendment was adopted."[5]
TRIAL BY JURY, ELEMENTS OF, PRESERVED
"Trial by jury," in the sense of Amendment VII, "is a trial by a jury of twelve men, in the presence and under the superintendence of a judge empowered to instruct them on the law and to advise them on the facts and (except in acquittal of a criminal charge) to set aside their verdict if in his opinion it is against the law or the evidence."[6] A further requisite is "that there shall be a unanimous verdict of the twelve jurors in all federal courts where a jury trial is held."[7]
a.s.suming such a jury, the amendment has for its primary purpose the preservation of "* * * the common law distinction between the province of the court and that of the jury, whereby, in the absence of express or implied consent to the contrary, issues of law are resolved by the court and issues of fact are to be determined by the jury under appropriate instructions by the court."[8] But the amendment "does not exact the retention of old forms of procedure" nor does it "prohibit the introduction of new methods of ascertaining what facts are in issue * * *" or new rules of evidence.[9]
