|
Judgment Notwithstanding Verdict
In the United States, Judgment notwithstanding the verdict, also called judgment ''non obstante veredicto'', or JNOV, is a type of judgment as a matter of law that is sometimes rendered at the conclusion of a jury trial. In American state courts, JNOV is the practice whereby the presiding judge in a civil jury trial may overrule the decision of a jury and reverse or amend their verdict. In literal terms, the judge enters a judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict. The rarely granted intervention permits the judge to exercise discretion to avoid extreme and unreasonable jury decisions. In civil cases in U.S. federal court, the term was replaced in 1991 by the renewed judgment as a matter of law, which emphasizes its relationship to the judgment as a matter of law, formerly called a directed verdict.See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50, ''Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1991 Amendment'' (noting the replacement of motions for "directed verdict or for judgment notwithstandi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judgment As A Matter Of Law
In the United States courts, a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) is a motion made by a party, during trial, claiming the opposing party has insufficient evidence to reasonably support its case. It asserts that the evidence allows only one result: victory for the moving party, even if a jury has found otherwise. JMOL is also known as a directed verdict, which it has replaced in American federal courts. JMOL is similar to judgment on the pleadings and summary judgment, all of which test the factual sufficiency of a claim. Judgment on the pleadings is a motion made after pleading and before discovery; summary judgment happens after discovery and before trial; JMOL occurs during trial. In United States federal courts, JMOL is a creation of Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. JMOL is decided by the standard of whether a reasonable jury could find in favor of the party opposing the JMOL motion. If there is no evidence to support a reasonable conclusi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Acquittal
In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal means that the criminal prosecution has failed to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charge presented. It certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the United States, an acquittal prohibits the Double jeopardy, retrial of the accused for the same offense, even if new Evidence (law), evidence surfaces that further implicates the accused. The effect of an acquittal on criminal proceedings is the same whether it results from a jury verdict or results from the operation of some other rule that discharges the accused. In other countries, like Australia, Canada and the UK, the prosecuting authority may appeal an acquittal similar to how a defendant may appeal a conviction — but usually only if new and compelling evidence comes to light or the accused has int ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Jury Nullification
Jury nullification, also known as jury equity or as a perverse verdict, is a decision by the jury in a trial, criminal trial resulting in a verdict of Acquittal, not guilty even though they think a defendant has broken the law. The jury's reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant's case, that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. It has been commonly used to oppose what jurors perceive as Rule according to higher law, unjust laws, such as those that once penalized runaway slaves under the Fugitive slave laws in the United States, Fugitive Slave Act, prohibited alcohol during Prohibition in the United States, Prohibition, or criminalized Vietnam War draft, draft evasion during the Vietnam War. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant. Such verdicts are possible because a jury has ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Finder Of Fact
In law, a trier of fact or finder of fact is a person or group who determines disputed issues of fact in a legal proceeding (usually a trial) and how relevant they are to deciding its outcome. To determine a fact is to decide, from the evidence presented, whether something existed or some event occurred. The factfinder differs by the type of proceeding. In a jury trial, it is the jury; in a non-jury trial, the judge is both the factfinder and the trier of law. In administrative proceedings, the factfinder may be a hearing officer or a hearing body.Law Dictionary: Fact-Finder Accessed 17 November 2008. Juries In a jury trial, a is the trier of fact. The jury finds the facts and applies them ...[...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Motion To Set Aside Judgment
In law, a motion to set aside judgment is an application to overturn or set aside a court's judgment, verdict or other final ruling in a case. Such a motion is proposed by a party who is dissatisfied with the result of a case. Motions may be made at any time after entry of judgment, and in some circumstances years after the case has been closed by the courts. Generally the motion cannot be based on grounds which were previously considered when deciding a motion for new trial or on an appeal of the judgment, thus the motion can only be granted in unusual circumstances, such as when the judgment was procured by fraud which could not have been discovered at the time of the trial, or if the court entering the judgment lacked the jurisdiction to do so. Motions to set aside judgments entered in civil cases in the United States district courts are governed by Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The rule is quite straightforward; its court room application is mostly exactly ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Jury Trial
A jury trial, or trial by jury, is a legal proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial, in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions. Jury trials are increasingly used in a significant share of serious criminal cases in many common law judicial systems, but not all. Juries or lay judges have also been incorporated into the legal systems of many civil law countries for criminal cases. The use of jury trials, which evolved within common law systems rather than civil law systems, has had a profound impact on the nature of American civil procedure and criminal procedure rules, even if a bench trial is actually contemplated in a particular case. In general, the availability of a jury trial if properly demanded has given rise to a system in which fact finding is concentrated in a single trial rather than multiple hearings, and appellate review of trial court decisions is greatly limited. Jury trials are of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Sixth Amendment To The United States Constitution
The Sixth Amendment (Amendment VI) to the United States Constitution sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. It was ratified in 1791 as part of the United States Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court has applied all but one of this amendment's protections to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants eight different rights, including the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury consisting of jurors from the state and district in which the crime was alleged to have been committed. Under the impartial jury requirement, jurors must be unbiased, and the jury must consist of a representative cross-section of the community. The right to a jury applies only to offenses in which the penalty is imprisonment for longer than six months. In '' Barker v. Wingo'', the Supreme Court articulated a balancing test to determine whether a defendant's right to a speedy trial had been violated. It ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Fifth Amendment To The United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment (Amendment V) to the United States Constitution creates several constitutional rights, limiting governmental powers focusing on United States constitutional criminal procedure, criminal procedures. It was ratified, along with nine other amendments, in 1791 as part of the United States Bill of Rights, Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court of the United States, Supreme Court has extended most, but not all, rights of the Fifth Amendment to the state and local levels. This means that neither the federal, state, nor local governments may deny people rights protected by the Fifth Amendment. The Court furthered most protections of this amendment through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment. One provision of the Fifth Amendment requires that most felony, felonies be tried only upon indictment#United States, indictment by a Grand juries in the United States, grand jury, which the Court ruled does not app ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (officially abbreviated Fed. R. Civ. P.; colloquially FRCP) govern civil procedure in United States district courts. They are the companion to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rules promulgated by the United States Supreme Court pursuant to the Rules Enabling Act become part of the FRCP unless, within seven months, the United States Congress acts to veto them. The Court's modifications to the rules are usually based upon recommendations from the Judicial Conference of the United States, the federal judiciary's internal policy-making body. At the time (1934) was adopted, federal courts were generally required to follow the procedural rules of the states in which they sat, but they were free to apply federal common law in cases not governed by a state constitution or state statute. Whether within the intent of Congress or not when adopting 28 U.S.C. 724 (1934), the situation was effectively reversed in 1938, the year the Federal Rul ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Jury Trial
A jury trial, or trial by jury, is a legal proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial, in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions. Jury trials are increasingly used in a significant share of serious criminal cases in many common law judicial systems, but not all. Juries or lay judges have also been incorporated into the legal systems of many civil law countries for criminal cases. The use of jury trials, which evolved within common law systems rather than civil law systems, has had a profound impact on the nature of American civil procedure and criminal procedure rules, even if a bench trial is actually contemplated in a particular case. In general, the availability of a jury trial if properly demanded has given rise to a system in which fact finding is concentrated in a single trial rather than multiple hearings, and appellate review of trial court decisions is greatly limited. Jury trials are of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Directed Verdict
In law, a verdict is the formal finding of fact made by a jury on matters or questions submitted to the jury by a judge. In a bench trial, the judge's decision near the end of the trial is simply referred to as a finding. In England and Wales, a coroner's findings used to be called verdicts but are, since 2009, called conclusions (see ). Etymology The term "verdict", from the Latin ''veredictum'', literally means "to say the truth" and is derived from Middle English ''verdit'', from Anglo-Norman language, Anglo-Norman: a compound of ''ver'' ("true", from the Latin ''vērus'') and ''dit'' ("speech", from the Latin ''dictum'', the Grammatical gender, neuter past participle of ''dīcere'', to say). Criminal law In a Criminal law, criminal case, the verdict, either "not guilty" or "guilty"—except in Scotland where the verdict of "not proven" is also available—is handed down by the jury. Different counts in the same case may have different verdicts. A verdict of guilty in a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Renewed Judgment As A Matter Of Law
In the United States courts, renewed judgment as a matter of law is a party's second chance at a judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) motion. Renewed JMOL is decided after a jury has returned its verdict, and is a motion to have that verdict altered. In US federal courts this procedure has replaced judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) through Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Renewed JMOL can only be raised before a jury begins deliberations. Seventh Amendment due process concerns demand this formality, as decided by the United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that turn on question ... in '' Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. Redman'', 295 U.S. 654 (1935). References Judgment (law) Civil procedure {{US-law-stub ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
