Also known as: FRCP Rule 50 · Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 · Rule 50 · judgment as a matter of law · JMOL
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural rule that authorizes a court in a jury trial to resolve an issue against a party who has been fully heard when the evidence provides no legally sufficient basis for a reasonable jury to find for that party.
Felicity French sued Fusion Power after a workplace accident. At trial she presented only photographs of the site and coworker statements about general conditions. Fusion Power moved for judgment as a matter of law on the causation element after she rested. The court granted the motion because no reasonable jury could find causation on the record presented.
Fiona Foster sued Frontier Capital for breach of contract. After she rested, Frontier Capital moved for judgment as a matter of law before the case went to the jury. The motion identified the damages element and the specific evidentiary gaps that entitled it to judgment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Fatima Flores sued Freeman Engineering alleging defective design. After she rested at trial Freeman Engineering moved for judgment as a matter of law on the design defect claim. The court granted the motion because the record contained no legally sufficient evidence on which a reasonable jury could find for Flores.
Fumiko Fujimoto sued Fidelity Trust after a vehicle accident. The court instructed the jury on a statutory presumption of negligence. Fidelity Trust moved for judgment as a matter of law at the close of evidence. The court granted the motion because the presumption alone did not supply a legally sufficient basis for the verdict.
Faith Fitzgerald obtained a jury verdict against Frontier Capital that included substantial punitive damages. Frontier Capital renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law after the verdict. The court reduced the punitive award because the evidence did not support the amount under the applicable legal standard.
Felipe Figueroa sued Fusion Power for employment discrimination. After he rested at trial Fusion Power moved for judgment as a matter of law. The court denied the motion because the record contained evidence that, if believed, would permit a reasonable jury to find for Figueroa on the disputed element.
A party may move at any time before the case is submitted to the jury. The motion must specify the judgment sought and the law and facts that entitle the movant to relief.
Supporting sources
The court may grant the motion when a party has been fully heard on an issue and a reasonable jury would lack a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for that party.
Supporting sources
The court is considered to have submitted the action to the jury. The movant may renew the motion after the verdict under Rule 50(b).
Supporting sources
Rule 50 applies after a party has been fully heard at trial. Rule 56 applies before trial when the record shows no genuine dispute of material fact.
Supporting sources
Yes. A party that fails to file a renewed motion under Rule 50(b) is barred on appeal from arguing that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the verdict.
Supporting sources
…the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." By its very terms, this standard provides that the mere existence of some alleged factual dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly supported motion for summary…