Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) are crucial tools in civil trials. They allow parties to challenge the legal sufficiency of evidence, potentially ending cases before jury deliberation or overturning verdicts afterward.
JMOLs serve as safeguards against unsupported jury decisions, maintaining the integrity of the legal process. Understanding their purpose, timing, and standards is essential for effectively navigating post-trial motions and preserving rights for potential appeals.
Purpose and Grounds for JMOL
Definition and Legal Basis
Top images from around the web for Definition and Legal Basis
LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc. - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Jurisdiction, Types of Law, and the Selection of Judges | Texas Government View original
Is this image relevant?
U S Courts: Due Process and Equality Under the Law | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc. - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Jurisdiction, Types of Law, and the Selection of Judges | Texas Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Definition and Legal Basis
LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc. - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Jurisdiction, Types of Law, and the Selection of Judges | Texas Government View original
Is this image relevant?
U S Courts: Due Process and Equality Under the Law | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc. - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Jurisdiction, Types of Law, and the Selection of Judges | Texas Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
(JMOL) challenges the legal sufficiency of evidence presented at trial
Governed by safeguards against jury verdicts unsupported by substantial evidence
Allows court to determine legally sufficient evidentiary basis for reasonable jury to find for non-moving party
Filed when absence of legally sufficient evidentiary basis on necessary element of opposing party's case
Can be made by either party typically filed by defendants seeking to avoid adverse jury verdict
Timing critical must be made before case submitted to jury to preserve right for renewed motion after verdict
Purpose and Function
Serves as procedural device to challenge evidence presented at trial
Enables court to assess legal sufficiency of evidence before or after jury deliberation
Protects against unsupported jury verdicts maintaining integrity of legal process
Provides mechanism for parties to address perceived weaknesses in opposing case
Allows judges to intervene when evidence presented fails to meet legal standards
Streamlines judicial process by potentially resolving cases without full jury deliberation (pre-verdict JMOL)
Pre-Verdict vs Post-Verdict JMOL
Pre-Verdict JMOL
Formerly known as motions for made after opposing party fully heard on issue during jury trial
Filed before case submitted to jury requires specification of law and facts entitling moving party to judgment
Allows court to evaluate sufficiency of evidence before jury deliberation
Can result in immediate judgment for moving party if granted
Serves as prerequisite for filing on same grounds
Timing crucial must be made before jury begins deliberations (typically at close of evidence)
Post-Verdict JMOL
Previously called motions for (JNOV) filed after jury returns verdict
Must be filed within 28 days of judgment entry or jury discharge for unresolved jury issues
Requires prior filing of pre-verdict JMOL on same grounds to preserve right
Can include alternative or joint request for new trial under Rule 59
Allows court to overturn jury verdict if legally insufficient evidence supports it
Provides mechanism for correcting errors in jury decision-making process
Standards for JMOL Consideration
Legal Standard and Evaluation
Courts apply stringent standard viewing all evidence in light most favorable to non-moving party
Determine whether reasonable jury could find for non-moving party based on presented evidence
Court cannot weigh evidence assess witness credibility or substitute its judgment for jury's
Requires evaluation of entire trial record to determine sufficiency of evidence
Considers both direct and circumstantial evidence in favor of non-moving party
Applies relevant legal standards to determine if evidence meets threshold for jury consideration
Potential Outcomes and Consequences
Pre-verdict JMOL grant court may enter judgment against non-moving party or defer until close of evidence
Post-verdict JMOL grant requires conditional ruling on any new trial motion
Potential outcomes include granting motion and entering judgment for moving party
Denying motion allows jury verdict to stand preserving original decision
Ordering new trial if motion granted in part addresses specific issues while preserving others
Court's ruling subject to appellate review de novo for legal questions substantial evidence for factual determinations
Impacts case resolution potentially ending litigation (granted JMOL) or affirming jury decision (denied JMOL)