Martin v. Eggman

Citations: 776 N.E.2d 928; 2002 Ind. App. LEXIS 1701; 2002 WL 31323187Docket: No. 49A02-0203-CV-241

Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; October 17, 2002; Indiana; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Michael Martin's appeal challenges the trial court's denial of his request for a jury trial following an appeal from a Marion County Small Claims Court decision. The original case involved Martin and Kimberly Eggman, which was adjudicated in small claims court on May 7, 2001. Martin appealed the decision on May 25, 2001, and subsequently filed an answer with a jury trial demand in the superior court, where a jury trial was scheduled for August 13, 2002. 

However, on January 25, 2002, Eggman objected to Martin's jury trial demand. The superior court upheld Eggman's objection on February 7, 2002, citing Indiana Code section 33.11.6-4-10(b), and vacated the trial date. Martin’s subsequent motions for reconsideration and oral argument were denied, but the court certified the order for interlocutory appeal.

The appellate court noted that Eggman did not file an Appellee’s Brief, allowing for a potentially less stringent standard of review for reversible error. The court emphasized that it could reverse the trial court's decision if Martin could demonstrate prima facie error. The standard for reviewing the denial of a jury trial request involves assessing for an abuse of discretion, defined as a decision that contradicts the facts or misinterprets the law. 

The document also highlights the procedural nuances between small claims and superior court rules regarding jury trial requests, specifically noting that a defendant must request a jury trial at least three days before the small claims trial date to avoid waiving the right. Once a case is appealed from small claims court, different rules apply under Indiana Code section 33-11.6-4-14.

All appeals from small claims court judgments must be taken to the county superior court, where they are tried de novo, allowing for repleading and essentially starting the litigation anew. This means the superior court can require a complete repleading even after a final judgment from the small claims court. Indiana Code section 33-11.6-4-14 mandates that appeals adhere to superior court procedural rules, specifically Marion County Superior Court Rule 81.1. This rule requires that any action from small claims court be repleaded in its entirety, starting with a new complaint in compliance with the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure. 

Trial Rule 38(B) dictates that a demand for a jury trial must be made within ten days after the first responsive pleading is due, and failure to do so waives the right to a jury trial. Martin, who did not request a jury trial in small claims court, argued that his request in the superior court was valid since the case was to be considered de novo. While he initially waived his right under the small claims court rules by not requesting a jury trial prior to the small claims trial, once he appealed and the case was tried de novo in the superior court, the superior court rules applied. Consequently, Martin's demand for a jury trial was proper when he filed it with his repled answer, as the appeal process allowed for a fresh start under the superior court's procedural rules.

Indiana Trial Rule 38(B) requires that a demand for a jury trial be made within ten days after the first responsive pleading. Both parties adhered to this requirement by timely filing a new complaint and answer. Martin included his jury trial demand with his answer, submitted before the ten-day deadline. This action met the standards set by Marion County Superior Court Rule 81.1 and Indiana Trial Rule 38(B). Consequently, the trial court erred in denying Martin's request for a jury trial. Additionally, while the request circumvents the small claims court's time limit for such demands, the Marion County Superior Court Rule mandates that cases on appeal comply with the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure. All pleadings and motions filed after the complaint must follow these rules. Martin's request conformed to both the Marion County Superior Court Rule and the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure. The trial court's judgment is therefore reversed, and the case is remanded for a jury trial as requested by Martin. Reversed. RILEY, J. and MATTINGLY-MAY, J. concur.