Legal Definitions - instructed verdict

An instructed verdict (also sometimes called a directed verdict) is a ruling made by a judge in a jury trial. It occurs when, after one side has presented its evidence, the judge determines that no reasonable jury could possibly find in that party's favor based on the evidence presented. In such a situation, the judge takes the decision out of the jury's hands and either instructs them to return a specific verdict, or simply enters the verdict themselves. This effectively ends the trial without the jury needing to deliberate on the facts, as the law dictates a clear outcome.

• Example 1: Failure to Prove a Key Element in a Contract Dispute

  Imagine a plaintiff sues a defendant for breach of contract, claiming the defendant failed to deliver a specialized machine as agreed. During the trial, the plaintiff presents evidence of their payment and the defendant's promise, but crucially, fails to present any evidence whatsoever that the machine was never delivered. In fact, the plaintiff's own witness accidentally testifies that the machine arrived last month. If the plaintiff rests their case without providing any proof of non-delivery, the judge might issue an instructed verdict in favor of the defendant. This is because a reasonable jury, based on the evidence presented, could not conclude that a breach occurred if there's no proof the machine wasn't delivered.

• Example 2: Lack of Causation in a Personal Injury Claim

  Consider a case where a plaintiff sues a manufacturing company, alleging that a defect in their product caused a severe allergic reaction. The plaintiff presents medical records confirming the allergic reaction and evidence that they used the company's product. However, the plaintiff fails to present any expert testimony or scientific evidence to establish a causal link between the product's alleged defect and their specific allergic reaction. Without this crucial evidence of causation, a reasonable jury would have no basis to conclude that the product was responsible for the injury. In this scenario, the judge could issue an instructed verdict for the manufacturing company, as the plaintiff has not provided sufficient evidence to support a key element of their claim.

• Example 3: Undisputed Evidence in a Debt Collection Case

  Suppose a bank sues a borrower for defaulting on a loan. The bank presents clear, undisputed evidence: the signed loan agreement, records showing the borrower's payments stopped, and a statement of the outstanding balance. The borrower's defense attorney then states they have no witnesses or evidence to present to counter the bank's claims. After the bank rests its case and the borrower offers no rebuttal, the judge would likely issue an instructed verdict in favor of the bank. Since the bank has presented overwhelming and uncontradicted evidence of the debt and default, and the borrower has offered no defense, no reasonable jury could find otherwise.