Such factual disputes cannot be decided upon motion for judgment on the pleadings. We express no opinion on the merits but remand because the trier of fact must make findings and decide based on those findings whether equitable relief is appropriate in this case. The superior court also concluded that the allegation of the specific lands to be conveyed was too vague to be enforced. Finally, appellants argue that the court erred by holding that they are not entitled to a jury trial because their request for specific performance is an equitable remedy that does not afford the right to trial by jury. In this case, there is no statutory right to trial by jury, and the Vermont Constitution guarantees the right to trial by jury only to the extent that it existed at common law at the time of its adoption.
Appellants request specific performance, which is an equitable remedy.
There is no remedy at law, for which they would be entitled to trial by jury, because it is barred by the Statute of Frauds. Consequently, plaintiffs are not entitled to trial by jury. Reversed and remanded. To distinguish members of the Gorton family, we refer to them by their first names. Moreover, the superior court affirmed the award of damages, the administratrix did not file a notice of cross-appeal in this Court, and she conceded at oral argument that she owed appellants the damages found by the probate court.