Legal Definitions - Motion For Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict

A Motion For Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict is a formal request made to a judge after a jury has delivered its decision in a trial. The party making this motion asks the judge to set aside or reverse the jury's verdict and enter a new judgment in their favor, despite what the jury decided.

The core argument behind this motion is that, based on the evidence presented during the trial and the applicable law, no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict that the jury actually did. In essence, the moving party contends that the jury's decision was legally unsupported by the evidence, or that the jury failed to properly apply the law to the facts presented.

It's important to note that in federal courts, this motion has largely been replaced by the Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL), which serves a similar purpose.

Here are some examples illustrating when a party might file such a motion:

• Contract Dispute with Clear Evidence:

  Imagine a lawsuit where a small business owner (Plaintiff) sues a supplier (Defendant) for breach of contract, claiming the supplier failed to deliver goods as agreed. During the trial, the Defendant presents undisputed, signed delivery receipts and a clear contractual clause stating that delivery was completed on time. Despite this overwhelming documentary evidence, the jury finds in favor of the Plaintiff. The Defendant could then file a Motion For Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict, arguing that no reasonable jury, presented with the clear and unambiguous contractual documents and delivery proofs, could have concluded that a breach occurred.

  This example illustrates the term because the Defendant is asking the judge to override the jury's decision, asserting that the jury's verdict was contrary to the clear and legally sufficient evidence presented regarding the contract's fulfillment.

• Personal Injury Case Lacking Causation:

  Consider a personal injury case where a pedestrian (Plaintiff) sues a driver (Defendant) for injuries sustained in an accident. The Plaintiff presents evidence of their injuries and the accident itself. However, during the trial, the Plaintiff fails to present any credible evidence linking the Defendant's actions directly to the specific injuries claimed (e.g., no medical expert testimony on causation, or evidence showing the injuries pre-existed the accident). Despite this critical lack of evidence on causation, a jury awards the Plaintiff a large sum. The Defendant could file a Motion For Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict, arguing that a fundamental element of negligence (causation) was not proven, and therefore, no reasonable jury could have found the Defendant liable based on the legally insufficient evidence.

  This example demonstrates the term as the Defendant seeks to overturn the jury's verdict because a crucial legal element of the claim (causation) was not supported by sufficient evidence, making the jury's finding of liability unreasonable in legal terms.

• Property Boundary Dispute with Definitive Survey:

  In a dispute between two neighbors over a property line, the Plaintiff claims a portion of the Defendant's land. The Defendant presents a recent, officially recorded land survey conducted by a licensed professional, which definitively establishes the property boundary in their favor, consistent with all legal deeds. The Plaintiff, however, relies on anecdotal testimony and an old, unrecorded sketch map. Despite the clear legal and professional survey, the jury sides with the Plaintiff. The Defendant could then file a Motion For Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict, contending that no reasonable jury could have disregarded the definitive, legally recognized survey in favor of speculative evidence, and thus the verdict is legally insupportable.

  This example illustrates the term by showing the Defendant asking the judge to disregard the jury's verdict because it was based on legally insufficient evidence (anecdotal testimony, old sketch) and ignored conclusive, legally sound evidence (official survey), making the jury's decision unreasonable from a legal standpoint.