Directed Verdict

What Is A Directed Verdict?

A directed verdict takes a claim, a defense, or a whole case away from the jury because the law requires a particular result on the evidence presented. The judge does not weigh credibility or decide who is more believable. The question is narrower: taking the evidence as it stands, could a reasonable jury find for the party opposing the motion? If the answer is no, the judge directs the result.

Either side can ask for one. A defendant asks when the plaintiff has not offered evidence of an essential element, such as proof that the defendant’s conduct caused the injury. A plaintiff may ask on a defense the defendant has not supported, or, less often, on liability when the facts are undisputed.

When Is A Motion For Directed Verdict Made In A North Carolina Trial?

At two points. The defendant may move at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence, and either party may move at the close of all the evidence. Under N.C. R. Civ. P. 50, a party who moves at the close of the opponent’s evidence does not give up the right to present its own evidence if the motion is denied. The motion must state the specific grounds for it, and an order granting it is effective without any assent of the jury.

Renewing the motion at the close of all the evidence is essential. Rule 50 ties the later remedies to it: only a party who moved for a directed verdict at that stage may ask afterward for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and an appellate court generally cannot order judgment for a party who skipped the step. In a trial before a judge without a jury, the equivalent is a motion for involuntary dismissal under N.C. R. Civ. P. 41.

How Does A North Carolina Judge Decide A Directed Verdict Motion?

By giving the non-moving party the benefit of the doubt. North Carolina courts view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, resolve conflicts in that party’s favor, and give that party every reasonable inference. If there is more than a scrap of evidence supporting each element of the claim, the case goes to the jury. The standard mirrors summary judgment under N.C. R. Civ. P. 56, applied to live trial evidence in place of paper.

This is why the order of proof matters to an injury plaintiff. Before resting, the plaintiff’s lawyer must be sure the record contains evidence of duty, breach, causation, and damages, including medical testimony linking the injury to the event when that link is not obvious. A missing element cannot be supplied by argument.

• Evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion.
• No weighing of credibility; that belongs to the jury.
• Granted only when the evidence permits one reasonable conclusion.
• Can be partial: a judge may direct a verdict on one claim or defense and send the rest to the jury.

What Is Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict In North Carolina?

It is the directed verdict motion renewed after the jury has spoken. When a motion made at the close of all the evidence is denied, the case is submitted to the jury subject to a later ruling on the legal question. Not later than 10 days after entry of judgment, the party who made the motion may ask the judge to set the verdict aside and enter judgment in its favor. The motion is granted only if the directed verdict could properly have been granted in the first place.

A motion for a new trial under N.C. R. Civ. P. 59 may be joined with it and has the same 10-day deadline. Judges often prefer this sequence. Letting the jury return a verdict and then ruling on the legal question avoids a second trial if an appellate court later disagrees with the judge.

Can Contributory Negligence Lead To A Directed Verdict In A North Carolina Injury Case?

Yes, and it is the most common way a North Carolina injury plaintiff loses at this stage. Contributory negligence is ordinarily a question for the jury, and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-139 puts the burden of proving it on the defendant. But when the plaintiff’s own evidence establishes it so clearly that no other reasonable conclusion can be drawn, North Carolina courts decide the issue as a matter of law. The state’s Supreme Court did so in Cullen v. Logan Developers and Moseley v. Hendricks, both involving dangers the Court treated as open and obvious.

Because the judge takes the plaintiff’s evidence as true, the risk comes from the plaintiff’s own testimony: where they were looking, what they could have seen, how fast they were going. Preparing that testimony honestly and thoroughly, and presenting the evidence that explains why a hazard was not apparent, is how a case reaches the jury. The contributory negligence guide covers the defense in detail.