Legal Definitions - Motion For Directed Verdict

A Motion For Directed Verdict is a formal request made by one party in a lawsuit, asking the judge to rule in their favor before the case is even sent to the jury for deliberation. This motion is typically made after the opposing side has presented their evidence, but before the jury has had a chance to weigh the facts and reach a decision.

The party making the motion argues that, based on the evidence presented so far, no reasonable jury could possibly find in favor of the other side. In other words, they believe the evidence is so overwhelmingly clear, or so lacking for the opposing party, that there's no need for the jury to consider the case. If the judge grants the motion, they essentially take the decision out of the jury's hands and issue a verdict directly.

In the federal court system, this type of motion is now more commonly referred to as a Judgment As a Matter of Law (JMOL).

• Example 1: Plaintiff's Motion in a Contract Dispute

  Imagine a software company, InnovateTech, sues a client, Global Solutions Inc., for failing to pay for a custom software development project. During the trial, InnovateTech presents a signed contract, detailed invoices, emails from Global Solutions acknowledging receipt of the software, and testimony from their project manager confirming completion. Global Solutions, in its defense, only offers vague denials and no concrete evidence to dispute the contract, the work performed, or the invoices. After Global Solutions rests its case, InnovateTech's lawyer might file a Motion For Directed Verdict, arguing that the evidence overwhelmingly proves Global Solutions breached the contract by not paying, and no reasonable jury could conclude otherwise. If the judge agrees, they would rule in favor of InnovateTech without the jury needing to deliberate.

• Example 2: Defendant's Motion in a Personal Injury Case

  Consider a case where a pedestrian, Ms. Chen, sues a driver, Mr. Davies, for injuries sustained in a car accident. Ms. Chen testifies about her injuries and pain, and her friend testifies about seeing the accident. However, Ms. Chen's legal team fails to present any medical records, expert testimony from doctors, or even police reports to establish the extent of her injuries, the cause of the accident, or that Mr. Davies was at fault. After Ms. Chen's side has presented all its evidence, Mr. Davies' lawyer could make a Motion For Directed Verdict. The argument would be that Ms. Chen has not provided sufficient legal evidence to prove key elements of her claim, such as Mr. Davies' negligence or the direct link between his actions and her injuries, and therefore no reasonable jury could find Mr. Davies liable. If the judge grants this motion, the case is dismissed in favor of Mr. Davies.