
	Where results make sense

Topic: Directed verdict

Related Topics

Guy Paul Morin

In the News (Tue 22 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	The PEOPLE v. BONAR
		For this reason, defendant moved for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the state's case.
		The lower court should have sustained the motion for a directed verdict for the reason that there was insufficient evidence to sustain conviction.
		A motion for a directed verdict was made at the close of the prosecution's evidence to test the sufficiency of the evidence.
	tipmra.com /kgb/WEB/case/Ohio/BONAR.htm (1212 words)

	Mass. Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 50
		A party may move for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence offered by an opponent, and may offer evidence in the event that the motion is not granted, without having reserved the right so to do and to the same extent as if the motion had not been made.
		Whenever a motion for a directed verdict made at the close of all the evidence is denied or for any reason is not granted, the court is deemed to have submitted the action to the jury subject to a later determination of the legal questions raised by the motion.
		If the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied, the party who prevailed on that motion may, as appellee, assert grounds entitling him to a new trial in the event the appellate court concludes that the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment not-withstanding the verdict.
	www.lawlib.state.ma.us /mrcp50.html (537 words)

	Michigan Appellate Digest - 173820 People v Mehall (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		The victim testified that the defendant raped her, and at the close of the prosecutor's proofs the defendant moved for a directed verdict on the basis that the victim's testimony was unbelievable.
		In deciding a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal, a court must not weigh the evidence or assess the credibility of the witnesses.
		Both a jury's verdict of acquittal and a trial court's verdict of acquittal based upon the insufficiency of the evidence are conclusive.
	courtofappeals.mijud.net /Digest/newHTML/17382021.htm (593 words)

	Rule 50.Motion for a Directed Verdict and for Judgment. (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		A party who moves for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence offered by an opponent may offer evidence in the event that the motion is not granted, without having reserved the right so to do and to the same extent as if the motion had not been made.
		A motion for a directed verdict which is not granted is not a waiver of trial by jury even though all parties to the action have moved for directed verdicts.
		If the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied, the party who prevailed on that motion may, as appellee, assert grounds entitling the party to a new trial in the event the appellate court concludes that the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
	www.touchngo.com /lglcntr/ctrules/civpro/CIV-54.htm (665 words)

	RULE 1.480. MOTION FOR A DIRECTED VERDICT (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		When a motion for a directed verdict made at the close of all of the evidence is denied or for any reason is not granted, the court is deemed to have submitted the action to the jury subject to a later determination of the legal questions raised by the motion.
		If a verdict was not returned, a party who has timely moved for a directed verdict may serve a motion for judgment in accordance with the motion for a directed verdict within 10 days after discharge of the jury.
		If a verdict was returned, the court may allow the judgment to stand or may reopen the judgment and either order a new trial or direct the entry of judgment as if the requested verdict had been directed.
	www.florida-justice.com /RULE%201.480.htm (313 words)

	No. 96-0418
		On appeal, Rural argues that the court properly directed the verdict on the punitive damages award but erroneously denied a directed verdict on the bad faith claim, and the submission of the punitive damages issue to the jury was prejudicial error.
		We conclude that the court properly denied a directed verdict on the bad faith claim, but because there was credible evidence to support the punitive damages award, it erred when it directed the verdict on the punitive damages claim.
		The court properly grants a directed verdict when it considers "all credible evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made" and determines that "there is no credible evidence to sustain a finding in favor of such party." See § 805.14(1), Stats.
	www.wisbar.org /res/capp/z1996/96-0418.htm (4598 words)

	[No title]
		Daleþs argument that the trial court erred by denying his motion for directed verdict is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.
		A motion for a directed verdict based on insufficiency of the evidence must specify the respect in which the evidence is deficient; a motion merely stating that the evidence is insufficient for conviction does not preserve for appeal issues relating to a specific deficiency such as insufficient proof on the elements of the offense.
		It is uncontroverted that appellant's motion for directed verdict, at the close of the State's evidence, was sufficiently specific to apprise the trial court of the grounds asserted for the motion.
	courts.state.ar.us /opinions/1996a/961204/ar951297.txt (2229 words)

	[No title]
		-- The motion for a directed verdict is a condition precedent to moving for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict based on the reasoning that a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is technically only a renewal of the motion for directed verdict made at the close of the evidence.
		Rule 50(b) provides: [w]henever a motion for a directed verdict made at the close of all the evidence is denied or for any reason is not granted, the court is deemed to have submitted the action to the jury subject to a later determination of the legal questions raised by the motion.
		The motion for a directed verdict is a condition precedent to moving for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict based on the reasoning that a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is technically only a renewal of the motion for directed verdict made at the close of the evidence.
	courts.state.ar.us /opinions/1996a/960925/ca95-847.txt (3181 words)

	Directed Verdict Law and Legal Definition - USlegalforms.com (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		A directed verdict is verdict rendered by a jury upon instruction by the judge that they must bring in that verdict because one of the parties has not proved their case as a matter of law.
		A judge in a criminal case may direct a verdict of acquittal when the judge finds the prosecution has not proved its case, but the judge may not direct a verdict of guilty, since that would deprive the accused of the constitutional right to a jury trial.
		In a criminal trial, when considering a motion for a directed verdict in a criminal case, the trial court is concerned with the existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its weight.
	www.uslegalforms.com /lawdigest/legaldefinitions.php/directed_verdict.htm (285 words)

	Tenn. Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 50 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		A motion for a directed verdict may be made at the close of the evidence offered by an opposing party or at the close of the case.
		The party whose verdict has been set aside on motion to have judgment entered in accordance with a motion for a directed verdict, as provided for in 50.02, may serve a motion for a new trial not later than thirty (30) days after entry of the judgment granting the motion.
		Whenever a court shall have granted a directed verdict, it shall not be necessary for the party against whom the verdict was directed to file a motion for a new trial in order to obtain appellate review of such action of the court.
	www.jesbeard.com /rule50.htm (574 words)

	People v Herbert
		The standard for determining whether a motion for directed verdict should be granted is whether, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence is sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to find the essential elements of the crime charged to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
		He ruled that the motion for directed verdict should have been denied because the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to support a finding of guilt.
		It is thus not permissible for a trial court to determine the credibility of the witnesses in the course of deciding a motion for directed verdict of acquittal.
	www.sado.org /ebrief/ebrief2/444mich466.htm (3749 words)

	[No title] (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		A directed verdict in a criminal case is proper only when there is a complete failure of evidence to establish an essential element of the crime charged or when the evidence is so doubtful in character, lacking probative value, that a finding of guilt on such evidence cannot be sustained.
		When the sufficiency of the evidence as to criminal intent is questioned, a direct expression of intention by the actor is not required; the intent with which an act is committed involves a mental process and may be inferred from the words and acts of the defendant and from the circumstances surrounding the incident.
		Thus, where a defendant makes a motion for a directed verdict at the end of the State's case, whether ruled upon or not, and the defendant thereafter presents evidence, the defendant has waived any error in connection with the motion for directed verdict made at the end of the State's case.
	www.nol.org /home/ncpa/ctopinio/A96-1304.htm (4787 words)

	Godfrey v. Res-Care, Inc., (03-790) 07/06/2004
		Defendant argues that because the trial court granted defendant directed verdict “as to the [employment] claims, based on the terms of the [employment] agreement as three years as opposed to at will,” the trial court was required to instruct the jury to disregard any evidence or inferences regarding plaintiff's employment claims.
		Thus, where a trial court denies a motion for directed verdict made at the close of plaintiff's evidence, it is error for the trial court to then enter judgment in favor of defendant notwithstanding the verdict.
		To survive a motion for directed verdict on a fraud claim, a plaintiff is required to provide sufficient evidence that the defendant concealed or made a false representation concerning a material fact.
	www.aoc.state.nc.us /www/public/coa/opinions/2004/030790-1.htm (4739 words)

	Converted WP file 25959
		The Appellants maintain that the lower court erred in granting the directed verdicts, that expert testimony was improperly excluded from consideration, and that the Appellants' evidence of deliberate intent was not properly evaluated.
		The directed verdict in favor of Patterson was entered on July 28, 1998, and Appeal Number 25960 was granted by this Court on that issue.
		The directed verdict in favor of Grasan was entered on August 27, 1998, and Appeal Number 25960 was granted by this Court on that issue.
	www.state.wv.us /wvsca/DOCS/fall99/25959.htm (3624 words)

	Cr02-318
		At the conclusion of the State's case, Cathey moved for a directed verdict, which the presiding judge, Judge Grisham Phillips, denied.
		Hardin: And we also would have the record show torenew my motion for a directed verdict on the capital murder charge and that there was insufficient evidence for a deliberated purpose of the killing.
		However, Cathey had failed to renew his motionfor directed verdict at the close of his own case, and indeed, he did not renew it until after the jury had already returned a verdict of guilt on the capital murder charge.
	courts.state.ar.us /opinions/2003a/20030123/cr02-318.html (1009 words)

	[No title]
		At the close of the plaintiff's evidence, defendant moved for directed verdict as to all of plaintiff's claims.
		I MALICIOUS PROSECUTION Defendant contends that it was error for the trial court to deny its motions for directed verdict, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and new trial as to the issue of malicious prosecution because there was not sufficient evidence of lack of probable cause and malice.
		In order to survive a directed verdict motion for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff must show substantial evidence of (1) extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant (2) which is intended to and does in fact cause (3) severe emotional distress to the plaintiff.
	www.ibiblio.org /pub/docs/nc-supreme-court/nov1693/duke.asc (2749 words)

	Vincent--Respondent's Brief
		We reject any suggestion that the trial court did not actually direct a verdict of acquittal as to the first-degree murder charge after hearing the arguments of counsel.
		The district court concluded that the trial judge’s decision on the motion for directed verdict “was clearly a determinative ruling on the sufficiency of the evidence of premeditation and deliberation and constituted a verdict of acquittal on the first-degree murder charge for double jeopardy purposes.” Pet.
		The question of whether a trial court may reverse a grant of directed verdict later in the trial is not squarely presented by this case, the lower court cases cited by Petitioner are distinguishable, and this Court's decision in Smalis forecloses such an argument on the facts of this case.
	www.law.wayne.edu /Faculty/Fac_web/moran/VincentRespondent.htm (6650 words)

	Mezzo v. The Queen (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		This appeal is to determine whether the trial judge erred in directing a verdict of acquittal despite the fact that there was some evidence as to the identification of the accused.
		In determining whether or not to direct a verdict in cases which turn on eyewitness testimony, the trial judge should address his mind to the factors going to the quality of the identification evidence and, where the frailties in the evidence can be remedied by a caution, he should leave the matter to the jury.
		At trial, the defence in a motion for a directed verdict vigorously attacked the failure of the police to conduct a proper line-up.
	www.lexum.umontreal.ca /csc-scc/en/pub/1986/vol1/html/1986scr1_0802.html (18161 words)

	[No title]
		Trial 266 (NCI4th)-- directed verdict -- caveat to will -- statement of grounds for motion The trial court did not err by granting a directed verdict for the propounders in a will caveat case where the caveators contended that the motion failed to state specific grounds in favor of the motion.
		The issues of undue influence and testamentary capacity were clearly identified, the grounds for the motion were apparent, and it is obvious that the motion challenged the sufficiency of the evidence as to these issues.
		First, while Rule 50(a) requires that a motion for directed verdict state specific grounds for the motion, failure to state such grounds is not a basis for an automatic reversal of the directed verdict on appeal.
	www.ibiblio.org /pub/docs/nc-supreme-court/may1794/joneswill (1358 words)

	Ca00-315
		Upon the conclusion of appellants' case-in-chief and prior to the presentation of appellee's case-in-chief, both parties moved for a directed verdict.
		A party may move for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence offered by an opponent and may offer evidence in the event that the motion is not granted, without having reserved the right to do so and to the extent as if the motion had not been made.
		Appellants moved for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence it offered, and because the trial ended prior to the presentation of appellee's case-in-chief, appellants obviously did not move for a directed verdict at the close of all the evidence.
	courts.state.ar.us /opinions/2000b/20001213/ca00-315.html (1667 words)

	LawKT.com: Law Firm Publications on Directed Verdict (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		The Court of Appeals earlier held that the trial court erred in granting directed verdict for the defendant because it was a jury question as to whether a reasonably prudent and careful person exercising due care for his or her safety would have looked down and seen the indentation in the pavement.
		Sanctions include entry of a default judgment or directed verdict, prohibition against the use of certain exculpatory evidence, or a jury instruction telling the jury that it may draw an adverse inference from the destruction of documents.
		Following entry of a directed verdict in favor of the parents, the reporter interviewed the prosecutor and was permitted to review the prosecutor's case file.
	www.lawkt.com /pubs/Directed_Verdict.html (5554 words)

	COURT SPLITS ON CLOSELY BALANCED CASE; MAJORITY REVERSES DIRECTED VERDICT
		Where there is evidence on both sides, a motion for directed verdict may still be granted, but only where all the evidence viewed in a light most favorable to the opponent so overwhelmingly favors the movant that no contrary verdict can ever stand.
		"A directed verdict is improper where there is any evidence, together with reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, demonstrating a substantial factual dispute, or where the assessment of credibility of the witnesses or the determination regarding conflicting evidence is decisive to the outcome.
		Positive direct testimony may be contradicted and discredited by adverse testimony, circumstantial evidence, discrepancies, omissions or the inherent improbability of the testimony itself.
	www.felahfd.com /HFDLaw/notebook/373.htm (1199 words)

	SurfWax: News, Reviews and Articles On Directed Verdict (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		Though this was the first time Welter won a case on a directed verdict motion, he said its not uncommon for judges to dismiss a case due to lack of evidence.
		Defense attorney Amber Gill requested the judge render a directed verdict of not guilty since she claimed the state hadn't proved the offense occurred in the state of Oklahoma nor in Alfalfa County.
		Roberts made a motion for a directed verdict of not guilty, saying prosecutors had not produced "one iota" of evidence that he was involved in the shootings.
	www.lawkt.com /files/Directed_Verdict.html (3379 words)

	Travent, Ltd. v. Schecter, 718 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-24)
		Thereafter, the Schecters filed a Motion for Judgment in Accordance with the Motion for Directed Verdict and a Motion for Mistrial, or in the alternative, a Motion for a New Trial.
		The trial court granted the Schecters' motion for directed verdict, denied the motion for mistrial, and granted their motion for a new trial.
		Travent argues that the trial court erred when it granted the Schecters' motion for a directed verdict because their claims were barred by the release.
	www.bbplaw.com /decisions/990107d.htm (1175 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)