This petition for writ of mandamus arises from the denial of a request for a jury trial. A complaint was filed on October 10, 1988, by Hope E. Bennett and Howard H. Bennett, as co-administrators of the estate of Michael Howard Bennett, deceased, against Perry Joe Blackmon, alleging the wrongful death of Michael H. Bennett. The plaintiffs did not request a jury trial. The defendant, Perry Joe Blackmon, did not demand a jury trial when he filed his initial pleading (styled an “answer”) on *550November 10, 1988. His request for a jury-trial was filed June 4, 1989, after a second pleading (also styled an “answer”) was filed with the trial court on May 30, 1989. He now petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus, contending that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request for a jury trial.

We consider the question of whether Blackmon’s request for a jury trial was timely made. Rule 38(b) and (d), A.R. Civ.P., governs the demand for a trial by jury and provides as follows:

“(b) Demand. Any party may demand a trial by jury of any issue triable of right by a jury by serving upon the other parties a demand therefor in writing at any time after the commencement of the action and not later than SO days after the service of the last pleading directed to such issue_ [Emphasis added.]

[[Image here]]

“(d) Waiver. The failure of a party to serve a demand as required by this rule and to file it as required by Rule 5(d) constitutes a waiver by him of trial by jury....”

On the authority of Rule 38, A.R.Civ.P.; Dorcal, Inc. v. Xerox Corp., 398 So.2d 665 (Ala. 1981); and Ex parte Reynolds, 447 So.2d 701 (Ala. 1984), we hold that the request for a trial by jury, filed over six months after the defendant’s initial “answer,” was not timely made.

WRIT DENIED.