Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

Motions for Directed Verdict: Failure to Move Is At Your Peril!
July 06, 2018

Trial counsel must make strategic decisions about whether and how to pursue their position before the court, striking a balance between preservation and the court’s ire. But when it comes to motions for a directed verdict, keeping mum will leave you in a bind.

In Seneca Ins. Co. v. Beal, No. CV 13-1737, 2018 WL 2984975 (W.D. Pa. June 14, 2018), a jury had returned a verdict in favor of the defendant, and against the plaintiff, on plaintiff’s negligence claim arising out of a fire that caused significant damage to plaintiff’s shopping plaza. Although the jury concluded that defendant was negligent when he removed a neon sign from the façade of a storefront in the plaza, plaintiff had not demonstrated that those actions or omissions were the factual cause of the fire. 

In its post-trial motion for a new trial, or in the alternative for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, plaintiff argued, among other things, that the jury had been confused by improper expert testimony and there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. 

The Western District of Pennsylvania denied the plaintiff’s post-trial motion. Because the case was submitted to the jury under Rule 50(a), and plaintiff had not moved for directed verdict under that rule, the district court concluded plaintiff could not move for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(b) and had waived those arguments.

Preservation Tip

While the motion for a directed verdict may feel like a futile effort, it is necessary to preserve your post-trial options. Err on the side of caution; don’t forego this motion!

 
Related Practices
Appellate & Trial Support Litigation and Trials
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.