28 U.S.C. § 1874
Actions on bonds and specialties
In all actions to recover the forfeiture annexed to any articles of agreement, covenant, bond, or other specialty, wherein the forfeiture, breach, or nonperformance appears by default or confession of the defendant, the court shall render judgment for the plaintiff for such amount as is due. If the sum is uncertain, it shall, upon request of either party, be assessed by a jury.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Benz v. Skiba, Skiba & Glomski, 164 F.R.D. 115 (D. Me. 1995).
Benz v. Skiba, Skiba & Glomski, 164 F.R.D. 115 (D. Me. 1995). “It states explicitly that this last clause of paragraph (2) preserves 28 U.S.C. § 1874 and similar statutes. Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules, 1937 Adoption, Note to Subdivision (b).”
Shepherd v. Am. Broad. Companies, Inc., 862 F. Supp. 486 (D.D.C. 1994). “, a Delaware corporation ("ABC Delaware"), ABC New York was dissolved. 4 . Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 55(b)(2) (emphasis added).”
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., 478 F. Supp. 889 (E.D. Pa. 1979). “§ 1873 (tort and contract actions in admiralty jurisdiction involving shipping on the Great Lakes); 28 U.S.C. § 1874 (jury to assess sum due on forfeiture of bond); 11 U.”
Sells v. Berry, 24 F. App'x 568 (7th Cir. 2001). “” See Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2) (if a hearing is required before entry of a default judgment, court “shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as is required by any statute of the United States”); 10A Charles Alan Wright et al.”
Two Old Hippies, LLC v. Catch the Bus, LLC, 784 F. Supp. 2d 1221 (D.N.M. 2011). “In the case of a default, only 28 U.S.C. § 1874 may guarantee a right to a jury trial, and that statute applies only to “actions to recover the forfeiture annexed to any articles *1233 of agreement, covenant, bond, or other specialty.”
Orlando Residence, Ltd. v. Kenneth Nelson, 565 F. App'x 212 (4th Cir. 2014). “28 U.S.C. § 1874 ; see D.H. Overmyer Co. Inc.”
Mwani v. Bin Ladin, 244 F.R.D. 20 (D.D.C. 2007). “The sole federal statute that entitles defaulted parties to a jury damages trial is 28 U.S.C. § 1874 , which governs actions to recover for certain forfeitures.”
Meyers v. Lakeland Supply, Inc., 133 F. Supp. 2d 1118 (E.D. Wis. 2001). “In contrast, 28 U.S.C. § 1874 is an example of a statute that specifically entitles plaintiffs to a jury trial as to damages in the event of a default judgment, providing that in “actions to recover the forfeiture annexed to any articles of agreement, covenant, bond, or other…”
Boccio v. Am. Bible Soc'y, 637 F. Supp. 2d 65 (D. Mass. 2009). “§ 1337 (a) is applicable, 2) Boccio’s reliance on 28 U.S.C. § 1874 (addressing “forfeitures annexed to any articles of agreement, covenant, bond, or other specialty”) was unavailing, 3) Boecio failed to cite any federal common law and the Court was unaware of any federal common…”
Am. Clothing Express, Inc. v. CloudFlare, Inc. (W.D. Tenn. 2025). “§ 1874 provides that: “In all actions to recover the forfeiture annexed to any articles of agreement, covenant, bond, or other specialty, wherein the forfeiture, breach, or nonperformance appears by default or confession of the defendant, the court shall render judgment for the…”
Davis (ID 06598) v. Schnurr (D. Kan. 2022). “§ 2254 ); Miller 1 Petitioner also cites 28 U.S.C. § 1874 , which by its plain language applies to v.”
Electrolux North Am., Inc. v. Performance Metals, Inc. (W.D.N.C. 2021). “2014) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1874 ; D.H. Overmyer Co. Inc.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.