Civil Procedure 6 - Motions at Trial

Formerly known as a directed verdict, based on evidence presented at trial.
Asks the judge to rule that no reasonable jury could disagree based on the evidence presented at trial
- Essentially argues that the trial is unnecessary because the outcome is clear.
The judge views the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party; will decide if reasonable people could agree on the result.
Similar to summary judgment, but it's made during the trial (rather than before trial)
A JMOL can only be granted after the other side has been heard at trial.
Example: After the plaintiff presents their evidence and rests, the defendant can move for JMOL.

Granted: Game over for the plaintiff; the defendant doesn't need to present evidence.
- The judge decides the plaintiff hasn't presented enough evidence to win, even taking all presented facts as true.
Denied: The trial continues, and the defendant presents their evidence.
Reserved Ruling: The judge postpones the decision until the defendant has presented their case.
Granting the motion may be appealed and other dispositions can't be.

After the defendant rests, the plaintiff can move for JMOL.
The judge views all evidence presented by the defendant in the light most favorable to the defendant.
If the judge decides that no reasonable jury could find for the defendant, the judge can grant the motion.
The motion doesn't have to dispose of the entire case. The judge can direct judgment on some issues while leaving others for the jury.
- Example: The judge determines no jury could find the defendant wasn't negligent, but the issue of damages remains.

A second chance motion made after the jury makes their decision.
It must be filed within 28 days of entry of judgment.
It uses the same standard as JMOL: no reasonable jury standard.
If granted, the court enters judgment for the party that lost the jury verdict.
**The judge essentially declares the jury's verdict unreasonable and substitutes it with their own.
A party making a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law has to do it within twenty eight (28) days of entry of judgment, and they must have made a proper JMOL at trial based on the same grounds. (no JMOL = no RJMOL).

David sues the Sip and Scuffle bar for negligence after being injured by a stray beer bottle during a fight.
David argues the bar failed to take reasonable steps to protect patrons.
David provides no evidence that the bar breached its duty of care (a prima facie element of a negligence claim).
When David rests, the bar moves for a JMOL, which is denied.
The jury surprisingly finds for David.
The bar, having properly moved for JMOL earlier, now makes a RJMOL.
The judge grants the RJMOL, finding that no reasonable jury could have found negligence given the lack of evidence of a breach of duty of care.

A less drastic remedy than RJMOL.
Filed within 28 days of the judgment.
Granted at the judge's discretion when there was some error at trial requiring a do-over.

Erroneous jury instruction
Newly discovered evidence that couldn't have been found earlier with due diligence
Misconduct by a jury, party, or lawyer
The judgment is seriously an error because it is against the weight of the evidence
Inadequate or excessive damages

The judge incorrectly instructs the jury to use a "clear and convincing evidence" standard when the correct standard is "preponderance of the evidence."
A party waives a JMOL, but the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. They can move for a new trial as a fallback.

RJMOL is a judgment for the losing party, ending the case.
A new trial is a complete do-over, offering the possibility for the same party to still win.
Survi question: can you do a motion for new trial after RJMOL found not in your favor, or is it either/or?