Was it error for the trial court to hold that the plaintiffs (appellant herein) have no right to a jury trial and was it error for the trial court to deny the plaintiffs’ request for a trial by a jury and did the trial court exceed its jurisdiction when it attempted to determine the matters of facts without a jury?
Was it error for the trial court to grant the defendants’ (appellees herein) motion for judgment on the pleadings and to treat said motion as a motion for summary judgment because there remained genuine issues of material fact and the plaintiffs (appellant herein) properly requested a trial by jury as a matter of fundamental right and they did not waive said right and that therefore the trial court lacked jurisdiction as a trier of facts?