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.
26. What is the electrician's attorney's best course of action after the close of evidence?
An electrician from State A filed a diversity action in State A federal court against an actress who resided in State B. The electrician alleged that the actress failed to pay the electrician $150,000 due on a valid service contract to install a kitchen in the actress's home. The actress disputed the contract's validity, testifying before the jury that the electrician installed the kitchen as a gift and exchanged emails referring to a «contract» that had been in jest. The electrician's attorney became increasingly concerned that the jury did not like his client during the trial.
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 successful motion for judgment as a matter of law has the effect of taking the case away from the jury and determining the outcome as a matter of law. FRCP 50(a)(1) states that if the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the party on that issue, the court may resolve the issue against the party and grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law against the party, on a claim or defense that under the controlling law can be maintained or defeated only with a favorable finding on that issue.
Although rare, a new trial may be granted under some circumstances for jury misconduct. Jury misconduct includes subjecting themselves to outside influence and concealing a bias or prejudice during voir dire. Such a motion can only be made after the jury's verdict. Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(a)(1)(A).
FRCP 56 allows either party to file a motion for summary judgment if, from the pleadings, affidavits, and discovery materials, it appears that there is no genuine dispute of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Unless a local rule or court order dictates otherwise, a party may file a motion for summary judgment at any time until 30 days after the close of discovery.
A is correct. The electrician's attorney should file a motion for judgment as a matter of law because it is the most likely avenue for getting relief at this point in the proceedings. By filing a motion for judgment as a matter of law, the attorney could argue that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient basis to determine that there had been no legal contract between the parties. The jury already heard evidence on the issue, and because the attorney believes the jury does not like his client, the best action would be to take the case away from the jury and submit it for the court's determination under FRCP 50(a).
B is incorrect. Filing a motion for a new trial on the ground of juror misconduct would not be the best course of action because it would be premature. The jury trial is still in progress, and a motion for a new trial under FRCP 59 may only be brought after a jury verdict has been returned.
C is incorrect. It is an incorrect assertion that the electrician's attorney can do nothing at this point in time. As explained above, the attorney may file a motion for judgment as a matter of law under FRCP 50.
D is incorrect. The electrician's attorney should not file a motion for summary judgment at this point because it would likely be too late given that such a motion must be filed by 30 days after the close of discovery, which has typically passed once the trial has begun. There is no evidence to indicate that the motion would be timely.