Legal Definitions - motion for j.n.o.v

A motion for j.n.o.v. (judgment notwithstanding the verdict) is a request made to a judge after a jury has delivered its verdict. The party making the motion asks the judge to overturn the jury's decision, arguing that no reasonable jury could have reached such a verdict based on the evidence presented at trial.

A motion for j.n.o.v., which stands for motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, is a formal request made by one party in a lawsuit to the judge. This motion asks the judge to overturn a jury's verdict and enter a judgment in favor of the party making the motion, even though the jury decided against them.

The party filing the motion argues that, based on the evidence presented during the trial, no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict it did, or that the verdict is contrary to the law. Essentially, it's an assertion that the winning party failed to present legally sufficient evidence to support the jury's decision, or that the verdict is so unreasonable that it cannot stand.

• Example 1: Lack of Essential Evidence

  Imagine a small business owner sues a supplier for breach of contract, claiming the supplier failed to deliver a crucial shipment of goods. The jury, perhaps swayed by emotional testimony, finds in favor of the business owner. However, during the entire trial, the business owner never presented any actual evidence of a written contract, an oral agreement, or even a purchase order with the supplier. The supplier's attorney could then file a motion for j.n.o.v., arguing that without any evidence proving the existence of a contract, no reasonable jury could legally conclude that a contract was breached. The judge might agree that a fundamental element of the claim (the existence of a contract) was not supported by any evidence, thus overturning the jury's verdict.

• Example 2: Verdict Contrary to Undisputed Facts

  Consider a personal injury lawsuit where a pedestrian was hit by a car. The driver admitted fault for the collision, and the only issue for the jury to decide was the amount of compensation (damages) the pedestrian should receive for their injuries. The pedestrian presented undisputed medical bills and lost wage statements totaling $75,000, and the defense offered no evidence to dispute these amounts. Despite this, the jury awarded the pedestrian only $5,000. The pedestrian's attorney could file a motion for j.n.o.v. regarding the damages, arguing that given the clear and undisputed evidence of $75,000 in losses, no reasonable jury could have awarded only $5,000. The verdict on damages would be considered contrary to the overwhelming and unrefuted evidence presented.

• Example 3: Evidence Legally Insufficient to Meet a Standard

  In a medical malpractice case, a patient sues a doctor, alleging negligence. The jury finds the doctor liable. However, the patient's entire case relied on the testimony of a single expert witness who, under cross-examination, admitted they were not board-certified in the specific medical specialty relevant to the case and had never performed the procedure in question. State law requires expert testimony in malpractice cases to come from a qualified professional in the same or a similar field. The doctor's attorney could file a motion for j.n.o.v., arguing that even if the jury believed the expert, their testimony was legally insufficient to establish the standard of care or a breach of that standard, as required by law. Therefore, no reasonable jury, applying the law, could have found the doctor negligent based on that testimony.