Legal Definitions - MDV

MDV stands for Motion for Directed Verdict.

A Motion for Directed Verdict is a formal request made by one party in a jury trial, typically after the opposing party has finished presenting all of their evidence. The party making the motion argues to the judge that, based on the evidence presented so far, no reasonable jury could possibly find in favor of the opposing side. Essentially, they are asking the judge to step in and rule in their favor immediately, without allowing the case to go to the jury for deliberation, because the evidence is legally insufficient to support a verdict for the other party.

Here are some examples illustrating how a Motion for Directed Verdict might be used:

• Civil Case - Insufficient Proof of Causation:

  Imagine a plaintiff sues a pharmaceutical company, claiming that one of their medications caused a rare side effect. During the trial, the plaintiff presents evidence that they took the medication and subsequently developed the side effect. However, their expert witness is unable to definitively link the medication to the side effect, and no other scientific evidence is presented to establish a causal connection. After the plaintiff rests their case, the pharmaceutical company's attorney could file a Motion for Directed Verdict. They would argue that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove that the medication actually caused the side effect, a crucial element of their claim. If the judge agrees that no reasonable jury could conclude causation based on the presented evidence, the judge would grant the motion, ending the trial in favor of the pharmaceutical company.

• Criminal Case - Failure to Prove an Element of the Crime:

  Consider a defendant charged with grand theft for allegedly stealing a valuable painting from an art gallery. The prosecution presents evidence that the painting was indeed stolen and shows security footage of a person resembling the defendant near the gallery around the time of the theft. However, the prosecution fails to present any direct evidence identifying the defendant as the person in the footage, no fingerprints or DNA link the defendant to the scene, and the stolen painting is never found in the defendant's possession. After the prosecution concludes its case, the defense attorney could make a Motion for Directed Verdict. The defense would argue that the prosecution has not presented enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was the actual perpetrator of the theft, which is a fundamental element of the crime. If the judge finds that no reasonable jury could convict the defendant based solely on the circumstantial evidence presented, the motion would be granted, and the defendant would be acquitted.