Roland v. Colgrove v. Hon. James F. Battin, United States Distict Judge for the District of Montana, Billings Division

Pursuant to the authority of Rule 83 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the District Court for the District of Montana promulgated its local Rule of Procedure 13(d)(1), effective September 1,1971:

In Civil Case No. 783 in the District Court for the District of Montana, petitioner, as plaintiff, sought a jury trial. Respondent District Judge, over the objection of petitioner that he was entitled to a jury of twelve, ordered that trial be to a jury of six persons, pursuant to the new local rule. Petitioner, by these proceedings seeking a writ of mandamus, challenges the validity of that rule. The defendant in Civil Case No. 783 has appeared in these proceedings, aligning itself with the position of petitioner.

The challenge to the District Court rule is primarily on three levels:

[I] 1. It is contended that the rule violates the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

We conclude otherwise.

In Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78 , 90 S.Ct. 1893 , 26 L.Ed.2d 446 (1970), the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment does not guarantee a right to a jury of twelve in criminal cases. While the question of whether this conclusion should apply to civil cases…