In Scott v. Neely, decided in 1891, the Court held that a court of equity could not even take jurisdiction of a suit 'in which a claim properly cognizable only at law is united in the same pleadings with a claim for equitable relief.' 140 U. S. 140 U.S. 106, 140 U. S. 117. See also Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 451, in which the principles expressed and applied in Scott v. Neely were explicitly reaffirmed. That holding, which was based upon both the historical separation between law and equity and the duty of the Court to insure 'that the right to a trial by a jury in the legal action may be preserved intact,' Id., at 140 U. S. 110. created considerable inconvenience in that it necessitated two separate trials in the same case whenever that case contained both legal and equitable claims. Consequently, when the procedure in the federal courts was modernized by the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938, it was deemed advisable to abandon that part of the holding of Scott v. Neely which rested upon the separation of law and equity, and to permit ...