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.
30. Which of the motions is the court most likely to grant?
The student offered extensive evidence contradicting the landlord's allegation that it was not his signature on the contract. Before the case was submitted to the jury, the student filed a motion for summary judgment and in the alternative, a motion for judgment as a matter of law. The landlord filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment.
A student from State A filed a diversity action against a landlord from State B in federal court in State A. The student sought $125,000 in damages arising out of a contract dispute. On January 1, 2020, the student was deposed. During his deposition, the student presented a contract signed by the landlord and testified that this was the contract at issue. On February 1, 2020, the landlord was deposed. During the landlord's deposition, the landlord testified that the signature on the contract was not his. On March 1, 2020, discovery for the parties closed. On December 1, 2020, the student's suit proceeded to 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
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 50(a)(1) states that if a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial and 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.
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.
The party seeking summary judgment has the burden of producing information that clearly establishes there is no factual dispute for a jury to resolve. 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.
Prior to filing an answer, the defendant may, if he chooses, file a motion and raise the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction under FRCP 12(b)(2).
C is correct. A party may make a motion for judgment as a matter of law when the other party has been fully heard on an issue. In practice, this means that the defendant may move for judgment as a matter of law at the close of the plaintiff's case, and either party may move for a directed verdict after both sides have rested. A party may move for judgment as a matter of law claiming that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient basis to find for the party on that issue.
Here, both sides have presented their case and the student offered extensive evidence refuting the landlord's claim that it was not his signature on the contract. As such, the court is most likely to find that a reasonable jury could not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to rule for the landlord.
A is incorrect. Under FRCP 56, until 30 days after the close of discovery, a party may move for summary judgment if there is no genuine dispute of material fact. This motion could not succeed here for two reasons. First, more than 30 days have passed since discovery closed. Second, even if the time to file the motion for summary judgment had not expired, summary judgment could not be granted because there is a genuine issue of material fact between the parties — whether the signature on the contract is, in fact, the landlord's. Even though the student offered extensive evidence contradicting the landlord's denial that it was his signature, there is still a genuine dispute of this material fact, so summary judgment would be inappropriate.
B is incorrect. As explained above, a motion for summary judgment is only appropriate when no genuine dispute as to material facts exists, and here, even though the student offered extensive evidence to contradict the landlord's allegation, there is still disagreement over the signature. As such, it would be improper for the judge to grant a motion for summary judgment on behalf of the landlord.
D is incorrect. The judge would not be able to properly grant a motion for lack of personal jurisdiction on behalf of the landlord because this defense must have been raised in a motion before filing an answer. At this point, the landlord has submitted himself to the court's jurisdiction and has waived lack of personal jurisdiction as a defense.