Motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict

Definition

A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is a request made by a party after a jury has delivered its verdict, asking the court to overturn that verdict on the grounds that no reasonable jury could have reached such a conclusion based on the evidence presented. This motion challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's decision and allows the court to correct any potential errors that may have occurred during the trial.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict can only be made after the jury has returned its verdict and is usually filed within a specific time frame set by court rules.
2. The court will grant this motion if it finds that the jury's decision was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence presented at trial.
3. This motion is often seen as a last resort for parties who believe that the jury failed to apply the law correctly or misinterpreted critical evidence.
4. If a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied, the party may still pursue other options, such as filing an appeal or seeking a new trial.
5. In some jurisdictions, this type of motion is referred to as a 'renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law,' highlighting its close relationship with pre-verdict motions.

Review Questions

• What conditions must be met for a court to grant a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict?
  • For a court to grant a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, it must find that no reasonable jury could have reached the same conclusion based on the evidence presented during the trial. The moving party must demonstrate that the evidence overwhelmingly supports their position, indicating that the jury's verdict was not just incorrect but was unreasonable given what was shown in court.
• How does a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict differ from a request for a new trial?
  • A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict seeks to overturn the jury's decision based on a lack of sufficient evidence to support it, while a request for a new trial typically focuses on procedural errors or issues during the trial itself. The former emphasizes the unreasonable nature of the jury's conclusion, while the latter can address various grounds, including juror misconduct or improper admission of evidence. Essentially, one challenges the verdict directly, and the other seeks to retry the case altogether.
• Evaluate how successful motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict are in practice and what implications this has for litigants.
  • Motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict are generally not very successful, as courts are often reluctant to overturn jury decisions due to respect for jurors' role in evaluating evidence. This reality can lead litigants to carefully consider their strategy before pursuing this motion. If they do decide to file it and are unsuccessful, they might still have options like appeals or new trials, but relying solely on this type of motion may not be an effective approach in many cases. Understanding this can help litigants manage their expectations and prepare alternative strategies.

Related terms

Judgment as a Matter of Law (JML): A legal ruling that determines whether there is enough evidence for a case to go to a jury, which can be made before or during trial.

New Trial: A legal process where a case is retried in its entirety due to errors or issues with the original trial, often initiated when a party believes the jury's verdict was incorrect.

Civil Procedure: The body of law governing the processes and rules for civil lawsuits, including how motions and appeals are handled in court.