Court Opinion

ID: 9832168
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:41:03.166034+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:43.359079
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
This motion has received due consideration, and our conclusion is that it shows no grounds for changing the views announced in our former opinion.
We concede that certain mandamus proceedings may be instituted in which the right of trial by a jury does not exist. For instance, a mandamus proceeding against a district judge to require him to proceed with *740the trial of a case, or in any other ancillary proceeding in which a writ of mandamus is sought, hut in which the merits of the case are not involved, the right of trial hy jury may not exist. In such a proceeding, it may be proper, with reference to the right of trial hy jury, to apply the same rule that applies in reference to an application for a preliminary writ of injunction or temporary restraining order. But when the proceeding is not ancillary to a pending or contemplated suit, and the only relief sought is a judgment or writ requiring the adverse party to do or refrain from doing a particular thing, a trial judge has no power in vacation to try the case and award the complaining litigant all the relief sought. And in such a case, whenever timely demand therefor is made, and a jury fee paid, the party so doing has the right to have a jury pass upon the contested issues of fact.
Motion overruled.