Waiver of Jury Demand Is Enforceable
By Gregory Poole was an owner-operator truck driver. In May 2000, Mr. Poole entered into a note, disclosure, and security agreement with Union Planters Bank to facilitate the purchase of a 1998 Freightliner XL Classic Truck from Long-Lewis Sterling Ford in Bessemer, Alabama. Pursuant to the agreement, the Bank provided Mr. Poole with $62,014 for the purchase of the vehicle, which he agreed to repay with interest over 60 months. The agreement did not set forth any specific obligations with respect to the transfer of the vehicle’s title from Alabama to Tennessee. The manager of the Bank’s Southgate branch, nevertheless agreed to “take care” of the matter for Mr. Poole at the time of the original loan.
The transfer of title was important to Mr. Poole because he needed a copy of the vehicle’s Tennessee certificate of title to renew his tags on a yearly basis. Unfortunately, the Bank lost the vehicle’s Alabama certificate of title before it could be transferred. The Bank, as a result, was unable to provide Mr. Poole with a copy of Tennessee title for a period of years, which nonetheless did not prevent Mr. Poole from persuading state workers to renew his tags on multiple occasions. Their leniency, however, eventually wore thin and Mr. Poole was not allowed to renew his tags in August 2004. Consequently, Mr. Poole could not lawfully operate his vehicle and was, in effect, temporarily put out of business beginning September 2004. The Bank, after substantial effort on its own part, was able to secure a duplicate of the vehicle’s original Alabama certificate of title, transfer the vehicle’s title to Tennessee, and provide a copy of the vehicle’s Tennessee certificate of title to Mr. Poole in early December 2004. Mr. Poole renewed his tags and resumed operation within a matter of days.
Mr. Poole filed suit to recover damages incurred due to the bank’s failure to timely provide a copy of said title. Prior to trial, the bank moved to compel arbitration and to strike the plaintiff’s jury demand based on contractual language found in the original agreement and a subsequent refinancing agreement. The trial court declined to compel arbitration but granted the motion to strike the jury demand. At trial, the plaintiff recovered in breach of contract. On appeal, the plaintiff challenged, among other things, the enforcement of his pre-dispute contractual waiver of the right to trial by jury.
Consistent with the majority view, the Tennessee Court of Appeals held that litigants are free to waive the constitutional right to a civil jury trial by prior written contractual agreement. The Tennessee constitution does not forbid or limit waiver of the right to trial by jury in a civil case. The Court further held that a pre-dispute contractual jury waiver is not an affirmative defense that must be raised pursuant to Rule 8.03. Poole v. Union Planters Bank, N.A., 2010 WL 1404416 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 8, 2010).
Related content
- Mixing Detainer Actions and Foreclosures
- New Tennessee Foreclosure Deficiency Law In Effect on September 1, 2010
Previous Post