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.
52. Which standard should the court use in ruling on the railroad's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law?
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the personal injury lawyers. The railroad moved for a renewed judgment as a matter of law.
A railroad brought an action for fraud against a group of personal injury lawyers in federal district court. The railroad alleged that the lawyers engaged with purported medical experts in a scheme to inundate the railroad with cases involving tortious exposure to asbestos, which lacked any merit. The railroad presented various forms of circumstantial evidence, including expert testimony. The railroad's expert testified that several of the clients in the previous asbestos cases who had been diagnosed by the purported medical experts as suffering from asbestosis, in fact, had no asbestos-related disease. Both the lawyers and the purported medical experts testified and denied the allegations against them. The railroad moved for a judgment as a matter of law, which the court denied.
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
B is incorrect. The railroad is the party moving for JMOL. As stated above, when ruling on a renewed motion for JOML, the court must review the evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party (here, the personal injury attorneys).
C is incorrect. When ruling on a renewed motion for JMOL, the court may not consider the credibility of the witnesses or attempt to resolve conflicts in testimony. Instead, the court must determine whether a reasonable jury would have a sufficient legal basis to find for the nonmoving party on the issue, viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the non-moving party (the personal injury attorneys).
D is incorrect. There is no policy that prohibits courts from entering judgments as a matter of law against attorney-litigants.