2. What is the buyer's best argument for persuading the appellate court to reverse the judgment?

In both federal and state litigation, the party who loses at trial generally has the right to appeal the adverse judgment. Generally, only final judgments are reviewable on appeal. Under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) 3 and 4, an appeal may be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the district court within 30 days from the entry of the judgment. The federal court system applies the final judgment rule. 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The basic concept is that an appeal is allowed only after all the issues involved in the suit have been finally determined by the trial court. A final order is one that disposes of the whole case on its merits, by rendering final judgment not only as to all the parties but as to all causes of action involved.

An order for a new trial is not considered a final judgment in the federal system. See Gospel Army v. Los Angeles, 331 U.S. 543 (1947) (finding that «for a judgment of an appellate court to be final and reviewable for this purpose, it must end the litigation by fully determining the rights of the parties, so that nothing remains to be done by the trial court. .. . Thus, where the effect of the state court's direction is to grant a new trial, the judgment will not be final»).

If the case reaches a jury, either party may move for a judgment as a matter of law, also referred to as a directed verdict, which has the effect of taking the case away from the jury and determining the outcome as a matter of law. 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.

D is correct. A judge may enter a judgment as a matter of law against a party on any issue whenever there are sufficient facts to resolve the issue, and the party has been fully heard on the issue. The judge may enter judgment as a matter of law against a party on that claim or defense if the issue is dispositive. The judgment must be supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law.

In this case, at the close of evidence, the judge made a judgment as a matter of law against the buyer. The evidence was solely documentary; therefore, the judge had all the information in the record and did not need to assess the credibility of any witnesses. The judgment was given at the close of evidence, and both parties had been heard on the issues. Thus, the judge was properly able to make a judgment as a matter of law. However, the judgment must be supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law. Therefore, the best argument the buyer can make to the appellate court is that the judge erred by not providing adequate findings for her conclusion.

A is incorrect. There is no rule that a judgment cannot be based on solely documentary evidence. Additionally, «clearly erroneous» is not the proper standard of review. Questions of fact may be reversed on appeal if clearly erroneous, with some dereference given to the trial court. Jury verdicts may also be set aside as erroneous if they are inconsistent or irreconcilable. Neither case applies to these facts.

B is incorrect. The manufacturer was not required to file proposed findings and conclusions before the court ruled. The judge merely needed to wait until the party ruled against had been fully heard on the issue. The judge properly waited until the close of evidence, after both parties had been fully heard.

C is incorrect. Neither party was required to file proposed findings and conclusions before the court ruled. The judge merely needed to wait until the party ruled against had been fully heard on the issue. The judge properly waited until the close of evidence, after both parties had been fully heard.