Also known as: directed verdict · directed-verdict · DV · judgment as a matter of law
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A judicial ruling that removes an issue from jury consideration because the evidence is legally insufficient for a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the nonmoving party. The court orders the jury to return a verdict in favor of the moving party.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Danielle Dixon sued Dixon Foods for breach after her employment offer was withdrawn. At the close of her case, Dixon Foods moved for a directed verdict. The court granted the motion because Dixon presented no evidence creating a genuine dispute on any element of promissory estoppel.
Devon Drake claimed defamation by Desert Oil. Drake offered only vague testimony that failed to show actual malice. The court directed a verdict for Desert Oil because the evidence was not significantly probative on the key element.
Dominic Drake faced weapons charges. The prosecution introduced handguns but offered no evidence linking them to Dominic. The court directed a verdict for Dominic because nothing in the record connected the weapons to him.
Dustin Donovan sued Dawson Steel for product liability. After Dawson moved for a directed verdict, the court granted it because Dustin failed to produce evidence on an essential element of his claim.
Doris Duffy was tried for murder. The prosecution's evidence consisted solely of circumstantial inferences that no rational trier of fact could accept as proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The court directed a verdict of acquittal.
Diego Duarte challenged a statutory presumption linking possession of guns to all occupants of a car. With no other evidence tying the guns to him, the court directed a verdict in his favor.
A court may direct a verdict when the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law for a reasonable jury to find for the nonmoving party on any essential element.
Supporting sources
Both require the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, with the court assessing whether the nonmoving party has produced significantly probative evidence.
Supporting sources
The judge must direct a verdict on that issue and cannot permit the jury to consider inadmissible or limited-purpose evidence for the missing element.
Supporting sources
…the trial sequence. An antitrust conspiracy plaintiff with evidence showing nothing beyond parallel conduct is not entitled to a directed verdict, see Theatre Enterprises ; proof of a § 1 conspiracy must include evidence tending to exclude the possibility of independent action, see Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp. , 465…