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.
49. Is the court likely to grant the buyer's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law?
The court denied the buyer's motion. The buyer then put on its defense at trial. The seller offered no rebuttal evidence, and the buyer did not renew the motion for judgment as a matter of law. The court submitted the case to the jury, which returned a verdict for the seller. Only then did the buyer move for a renewed judgment as a matter of law.
At trial, after the seller put on minimal evidence and rested its case, the buyer moved for judgment as a matter of law, arguing that the seller failed to prove that its goods conformed to the contract specifications and that the buyer was therefore entitled to judgment on the breach of contract claim.
A seller filed suit in federal district court against a buyer for breach of contract, asserting that the buyer failed to pay the contracted price. The buyer argued that the seller did not substantially perform his portion of the contract because the goods delivered did not meet the contractually agreed-upon specifications, so the buyer was not obligated to pay the contract price.
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. As a plaintiff, the seller does not automatically have a burden to rebut the defendant's evidence at trial. A plaintiff who satisfies her burden during the initial case may not have to offer any evidence in rebuttal. Here, however, the facts state that the seller put on minimal evidence, indicating that the court should grant the buyer's renewed motion, as stated above.
C is incorrect. A trial judge has the power to depart from its earlier rulings. Here, even though the buyer's motion was denied at the close of the seller's case in chief, that does not prevent finding for the buyer following the buyer's renewed motion.
D is incorrect. A party who has made a motion for judgment as a matter of law during the trial has the option to make a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, formerly a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, following a judgment being entered against them. The party simply must renew its motion no later than 28 days after the judgment is entered against them. Therefore, the buyer was not required to renew his motion after the buyer put on his defense, and it was permissible to renew his motion following the jury's verdict.