Case brief form Case Name | Curtis v. Loether | Citation(year) | 415 U.S. 189 (1974) | Court/J. | U.S. Supreme Court | Procedural History | District Court held that a jury trial was neither authorized by Title VIII nor required by the Seventh Amendment and denied the jury request. The Court of Appeals reversed on the jury trial issue. The Court concluded essentially that the Seventh Amendment gave respondents the right to a jury trial in this action, and therefore interpreted the statute to authorize jury trial so as to eliminate any question of its constitutionality. | Short Facts | Petitioner, an African American woman, brought a civil action suit against respondents for refusing to rent an apartment to petitioner based on her race. Petitioner contends that respondents’ action constituted a violation of§ 812 of Title VIII. The complaint sought only injunctive relief and punitive damages. A claim for compensatory damages was later added. Respondents filed a demand for a jury trial, which the district court denied. The court of appeals reversed the decision based on the jury trial issue. | Issues | Whether the Civil Rights Act of 1968 or the Seventh Amendment requires a jury trial upon demand of one of the parties in an action for damages and injunctive relief? | Holdings | Yes. The Seventh Amendment entitles either party to demand a jury trial in an action for damages in federal court under the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The right to a jury trial applies to actions enforcing statutory rights. Further, the traditional relief sought is the traditional form offered in the court of law. When Congress provides for enforcement of statutory rights in an ordinary civil action in the district courts, a jury trial must be available if the action involves rights and remedies of the sort typically enforced by law. Petitioner’s policy argument is that a