Which statement is true about post-trial motions in federal practice?

Which statement is true about post-trial motions in federal practice?

• A. Directed verdict is available after verdict
• B. A party cannot renew a judgment as a matter of law
• C. A motion for judgment as a matter of law can be renewed after verdict
• D. There are no post-trial motions

Answer: (C)

Post-trial motions in federal practice include renewing a judgment as a matter of law after the verdict. You can move for judgment as a matter of law during trial, and you may renew that motion after verdict under Rule 50(b). The standard for renewal is the same as for the pre-verdict motion: there must be no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for the nonmoving party, viewed in the light most favorable to that party. If the court grants the renewal, judgment is entered accordingly; if not, the verdict stands. There are other post-trial options, such as a motion for a new trial, but the possibility of renewing a JMOL after verdict is the correct concept here.

Post-trial motions in federal practice include renewing a judgment as a matter of law after the verdict. You can move for judgment as a matter of law during trial, and you may renew that motion after verdict under Rule 50(b). The standard for renewal is the same as for the pre-verdict motion: there must be no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for the nonmoving party, viewed in the light most favorable to that party. If the court grants the renewal, judgment is entered accordingly; if not, the verdict stands. There are other post-trial options, such as a motion for a new trial, but the possibility of renewing a JMOL after verdict is the correct concept here.