Litigation can be a rough game, with little regard to substantive fairness or justice.

If the parties are offered a way out of our civil system which meets their needs, who are are to push them back into the civil system?

The point is not to "push" the parties either way. I recall judicial strong arm tactics at mandatory settlement conferences early in my practice. Those strong arm tactics are still in use by mediators today, undercutting the principle of self-determination that is at the heart of sound mediation practice. That is, at any rate, the principle that guides my own practice and that I would hope mediation "best practices" would include and encourage.

Litigation is VERY rough & I take your point about academics opining without real world experience.

Thanks, as always, for dropping by to add your thoughts!

Your thoughts?

If I understand correctly, in matters of "common law" (where one is seeking money as remedy), one is entitled to a jury trial; and in matters of "equity" (where one is seeking fairness as remedy), one is not entitled to a jury trial.

2. WHY ARE CITIZENS ENTITLED TO JURY TRIALS IN CRIMINAL LAW? IS CRIMINAL LAW PART OF THE COMMON LAW SYSTEM, EQUITY SYSTEM OR A SEPARATE SYSTEM?

3. IF CRIMINAL LAW IS PART OF THE COMMON LAW SYSTEM, HOW CAN THIS BE IF THE REMEDY BEING SOUGHT IS NOT MONETARY?

3. IF FAMILY LAW IS A MATTER OF EQUITY, HOW CAN TEXAS ALLOW FOR JURY TRIALS IN CHILD CUSTODY MATTERS?

Thank you so much.

As to the remainder of your questions, take a look at the American Judicature Society:http://www.ajs.org/jc/juries/jc_right_overview.asp. The following is from that site:

"In civil cases in federal court, the right to a jury trial is governed by the Seventh Amendment:

"In Suits at Common Law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried to a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the Common Law.

". . . . . as of the time of the Amendment’s adoption in 1791 there were several kinds of cases that were not “Suits at Common Law,” like suits in equity or admiralty; those suits were not entitled to jury trials in 1791, and still are not.

"But subsequently many kinds of suits have come into being that did not exist at all in 1791, and the law/equity distinction was abolished in 1938.

"In this drastically changed legal landscape, it is sometimes difficult to decide what jury trial rights “shall be preserved” under the Seventh Amendment.

"One rule of thumb is that if the suit seeks money damages—the traditional remedy under the common law—there is almost surely a right to a jury trial, while if the suit seeks only equitable relief—like an injunction—there almost surely is no right to a jury trial.

"In civil cases in state court, the right to a jury trial is governed by the state’s constitution and statutes. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial applies only to federal courts, not to state courts.

"As a practical matter, though, most states make jury trials widely available for many kinds of civil cases above the level of small claims court.

"The governing law for criminal cases in both federal and state courts is the Sixth Amendment, which provides in part:

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed . . . .

1. If I understand correctly, per the US Constitution, the right to a jury trial is afforded in all criminal cases per the Sixth Amendment and in federal civil cases per the Seventh Amendment, and that the right to a jury trial in a state civil case is dependent upon the state. Please confirm.

2. Juries provide protection. How can it be justified that one is entitled to a jury trial for matters of money but not child custody, the latter obviously being of far more importance? Did child custody cases exist in 1791?

3. Are child custody cases matters of "common law" or "equity?"

I sincerely thank you for your time and consideration.

Renee