Case Name: Molly Borowsky and Others, Respondents, v. Pauline Gallin, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1908-05-08
Citations: 126 A.D. 364
Docket Number: 
Parties: Molly Borowsky and Others, Respondents, v. Pauline Gallin, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 126
Pages: 364–366

Head Matter:
Molly Borowsky and Others, Respondents, v. Pauline Gallin, Appellant.
Second Department,
May 8, 1908.
Equity—jury trial.
It is wholly within the discretion of the court as to whether the issues of fact in a suit to foreclose a mortgage on lands shall he sent to a jury.
A verdict in such suit is not binding on the court.
In refusing to send the issues in such suit to a jury, the court may consider the fact that the jury calendar is in arrears.
Hooker and Woodward, JJ., dissented, with opinion.
Appeal by the defendant, Pauline Gallin, from an order of the County Court of Kings county, entered in the office of the clerk of said county on the 14th day of January, 1908, denying-the defendant’s motion to settle the issues and for trial by a jury.
The action is to foreclose a mortgage on real estate made by the defendant.
William, H. Chorosh, for the appellant.
Frank F. Davis, for the respondents.

Opinion:
Gaynor, J.:
It was in the discretion of the court below whether it should direct that the issues of fact, or any of them, should be sent to a jury trial (Code Civ. Proc. § 971). It was influenced to some extent in denying the motion by the condition of the jury calendar (it is over two years in arrears) as the memorandum filed with its decision shows. This was not improper. Indeed, motions like this are sometimes made hereabouts to avoid the speedy trial afforded by the equity calendar. A verdict for the defendant would not bind the court; it has the responsibility of giving judgment in the end, and the rule is for the court to try such cases without having its conscience enlightened or aided by a verdict.
The order should be affirmed.
High and Miller, JJ., concurred ; Hooker, J., read for reversal, with whom Woodward, J., concurred.