Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
12. What is the best way for the casino's attorney to attack the verdict?
The casino's attorney believes that the ex-wife's testimony was unfairly prejudicial and should not have been admitted.
At trial, the tourist's attorney attempted to introduce testimony of the security guard's ex-wife, who had filed several complaints of spousal abuse against the security guard. The casino's attorney objected that the evidence was irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial. The court overruled the objection, and the ex-wife testified. The jury returned a verdict for the tourist, awarding him $82,000 in damages.
After being forcibly ejected from a casino, a tourist brought a federal diversity action against the casino, seeking $105,000 in damages. The tourist claimed that the casino's security guard had used excessive force when ejecting him from the casino, causing severe personal injuries.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The erroneous admission of the ex-wife's testimony could be a basis for an appeal. However, the most immediate way for the casino's attorney to obtain the desired relief is to move for a new trial at the trial-court level. Additionally, the casino's attorney may raise the preserved evidentiary objection as a ground for a new trial.
C is incorrect. A motion for judgment as a matter of law is not the proper vehicle for raising the erroneous admission of evidence. Rather, it is a motion used to indicate that the evidence that has been presented to the court is so one-sided that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Further, a motion for judgment as a matter of law may be raised after a jury verdict only if it was first made before the case was submitted to the jury, which did not occur here.
D is incorrect. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 60(b)(1) authorizes relief from a judgment entered due to a mistake. Typically, this rule covers party mistakes in allowing a default judgment to be entered or judicial mistakes in the entry of the judgment itself. Judicial errors in admitting evidence are not treated as the type of mistake that merits relief under FRCP 60(b)(1).