AVT New Jersey v. Cubitac Corp, 2:19-cv-00662

AVT New Jersey, L.P. (lessor) sued Cubitac Corp. (lessee) and Yoel Weiss (personal guarantor) after Cubitac failed to make its first lease payment.
The Master Lease and Weiss’s Personal Guaranty each contain bolded, conspicuous jury-waiver clauses: parties "waive all rights to a trial by jury to the fullest extent permitted by law."
Defendants were represented by counsel during negotiations and requested changes to the agreement; counsel exchanged emails about revisions.
Defendants contend there was a gross disparity in bargaining power, that Weiss lacked sophistication and did not notice the bolded waiver, and that further discovery (re assignment) is needed.
AVT moved to strike Defendants’ jury demand; AVT also sought attorneys’ fees for bringing the motion based on contractual fee-shifting provisions.
Magistrate Judge Pead granted the motion to strike the jury demand and awarded AVT the right to recover reasonable fees for the motion, directing AVT to file a fee affidavit within 30 days.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Enforceability of the jury-waiver clauses	The waiver language is unambiguous, conspicuous (bold), and knowingly accepted; enforce waiver.	Waiver unenforceable due to gross disparity in bargaining power, lack of sophistication, and failure to notice bolded language.	Waiver enforceable: parties were represented, negotiated terms, and clauses were conspicuous; no gross disparity shown.
Need for further discovery before deciding waiver	No discovery necessary because contract language is unambiguous and admissible facts establish voluntary waiver.	Decision premature; discovery needed on assignment and surrounding negotiations.	Denied: court found record sufficient and contract interpretation may be resolved as a matter of law.
Entitlement to attorneys’ fees for bringing the motion	Defendants breached the agreement by filing a jury demand; fee-shifting clause entitles AVT to fees.	Argues fee provision shows unequal bargaining power but does not directly oppose fee recovery here.	Granted: contractual fee provisions permit recovery; AVT to submit affidavit/documentation of fees.

Telum, Inc. v. E.F. Hutton Credit Corp., 859 F.2d 835 (10th Cir. 1988) (federal law governs jury-trial right; waiver clauses may be enforceable)
Simler v. Conner, 372 U.S. 221 (U.S. 1963) (Seventh Amendment jury right is governed by federal law for uniformity)
Leasing Serv. Corp. v. Crane, 804 F.2d 828 (4th Cir. 1986) (jury-trial right may be knowingly and intentionally waived by contract)
K.M.C. Co. v. Irving Trust Co., 757 F.2d 752 (6th Cir. 1985) (parties may waive jury trial by prior written agreement)
WebBank v. Am. Gen. Annuity Serv. Corp., 54 P.3d 1139 (Utah 2002) (if contract language is unambiguous, courts interpret it as a matter of law)