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.
7. Should the appellate court consider the wholesaler's challenge?
The jury found for the retailer on both claims. After the court entered judgment on the verdict, the wholesaler moved for a new trial and for judgment as a matter of law, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdict on either claim. The court acknowledged that there had been problems with some of the evidence, but it denied the motions. The wholesaler appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.
A retailer brought a federal diversity action against a wholesaler, alleging breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation. After the parties presented their evidence at trial, the court instructed the jury on the law. Neither party filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law before the case went to the jury.
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
To preserve an error for appellate review, the appropriate objection or motion must be made at the correct time in the trial court. A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence should be made as a motion for judgment as a matter of law before the case is submitted to the jury. The motion must then be made again, as a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, after the verdict. This preserves the issue for appeal.
B is correct. The appellate court should not consider the wholesaler's challenge because, for the issue to be properly heard on appeal, the wholesaler had to have preserved the error during trial. But the wholesaler failed to do so. Therefore, the wholesaler was not able to move for a renewed motion of judgment of law after the verdict. The argument concerning the sufficiency of the evidence is a legal argument, which must be made to the trial court. After the trial court rules on the issue, it is subject to appellate review. Because the issue was never ruled on in the trial court, the appellate court cannot consider the challenge.
A is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. Although the appellate court should not consider the wholesaler's challenge, it is not because it cannot hear sufficiency-of-the-evidence motions. In fact, the appeals court can hear such an issue as long as it was properly preserved at the trial level. This was not the case here, which is why the appellate court should not hear the case.
C is incorrect. This is an incorrect statement of the facts. The issue regarding the sufficiency of the evidence was NOT properly raised and ruled on by the trial court before the wholesaler filed the appeal. The trial court never heard any arguments on the merits of the issue, which means it is not appealable.
D is incorrect. This answer choice is appealing because the reasoning is a true fact; however, it is a red-herring meant to lead you astray. The judge's comment is irrelevant, as a formal motion on the issue was never properly made or argued.