Case Name: EARL N. KAPITZKE, ADMR., C.T.A. vs. F. MILLS CO., ET AL.
Court: Connecticut Superior Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1939-02-15
Citations: 7 Conn. Supp. 46
Docket Number: File No. 55579
Parties: EARL N. KAPITZKE, ADMR., C.T.A. vs. F. MILLS CO., ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Supplement
Volume: 7
Pages: 46–47

Head Matter:
EARL N. KAPITZKE, ADMR., C.T.A. vs. F. MILLS CO., ET AL.
Superior Court New Haven County
File No. 55579
MEMORANDUM FILED FEBRUARY 15, 1939.
Harry A. Cooper, of Meriden, for the Plaintiff.
George A. Clark, of Meriden, for the Defendants.

Opinion:
BOOTH, J.
The action set forth in the complaint is based on the plaintiff's claimed right of an accounting and a money judgment as incident thereto. These and further allegations in the complaint are evidently designed to set up a fiduciary relationship between the plaintiff and the defendants, and to seek the relief prayed for on the basis of such relationship.
Thus is pleaded a cause or causes of action "properly cog' nizable in equity" prior to 1880. Bristol vs. Pitchard, 81 Conn. 451. Under these circumstances a jury trial is a matter of the court's discretion, which should be exercised to promote the most expeditious disposition of the cause consistent with a legal and just determination of the issues presented.
In the opinion of the court, after a review of the pleadings, this result is more likely to follow from a court trial than by a trial by a jury.
For the foregoing reasons the motion as made is granted and the case is hereby ordered stricken from the jury docket.