Posted on 02/14/2022 1:05:17 PM PST by PghBaldy
It’s called JNOV or in English, Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict.
He’s hoping the jury will decide against her — then he won’t JNOV her. But announcing it before the verdict is bizarre and amounts to jury tampering — there’s no way the jurors won’t hear that the judge is going to dismiss.
You are wrong about a judge being to declare a mistrial if a jury declares a not guilty verdict.
A judge can declare a mistrial if the prosecutor hides evidence or their is a hung jury.
Actual malice is a state of mind determination. So there’s rarely direct evidence; its almost always based on circumstances. [the Perry Mason ‘smoking gun’ revelations are one-in-a-career type thing]
A directed verdict [legal equivalent to dismissal following close of evidence] is reserved for when (1) no evidence was produced or (2) such a paucity of evidence no reasonable person could conclude malice existed.
It happens, but usually when the plaintiff’s lawyer is a shlub and there is no evidence AT ALL on the issue. If there’s any evidence, such motions are routinely denied since it is the jury, not the judge, that determines weight/credibility of evidence. A Sua Sponte [from the bench] announcement like this is very, very weird pre-verdict and tips the judge’s hand regarding his bias on the case. Very weird. Never seen it before [30 yrs as a trial lawyer] weird.
I didn’t follow trial so I can’t speak to whether that standard has been met, but I would doubt Palin’s lawyers failed to have a single witness or exhibit on this issue.
Assuming the jury finds for Palin, the judge has telegraphed a directed verdict overturning the jury verdict. That, by itself, will likely then be reversed on appeal [reinstating the jury’s verdict or granting new trial]
Actually, she didn’t have to sue the NYT in Mew York. She could have sue in prettyuch any US District Court in the Country since the NYT is sold in every State in the Country.
I’ve wondered why she or her attorneys didn’t select a much more favorable state.
Once a case goes to a jury, a judge almost never dismissed the case prior to a verdict. If a judge decides to dismiss on a JNOV after the verdict,the appeals court has something on which to base the jury verdict and damages awarded.
Mea culpa, I think you are correct on this. I was recalling the three trials of talk show guy who gave a judge's address. Must have been two hung juries.
Everything NYT does is with malice. They exist to destroy the enemies of the democrat party.
Directed Verdict.
AFAIK, you need a verdict for a JNOV to obtain.
I believe this is a directed verdict.
Jury will presumably be dismissed before rendering a verdict
The leftist media’s attacks on Palin have been nothing but malice.
Why not.... next time ... sit on the jury and nullify the federal or the state’s case ... no matter what they prove. If an FIB agent is a witness in the case ... even better.
Not even pretending anymore.
Good point. I’m generally referring to CIVIL court cases here.
With that in mind, I’m wondering if this was simply Palin’s way of humiliating the NYT by exposing its staff as a bunch of political hacks and incompetent misfits.
The threshold is higher for a public figure, but not insurmountable.
The standard is a blatant disregard of the truth or malicious intent.
Palin’s attorney certain established factual evidence that a jury could meet the standard. The judge was totally out of line, especially after the Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back down for a trial on the facts. If the COA believed the factual allegations were insufficient, it would have upheld the first dismissal by the District Court Judge. At a minimum, the Judge was pretty much required to let the jury make a decision. As it stands now, the Circuit Court will order a new trial with a different Judge.
Keep in mind that juries determines the facts and apply them to the law. It is not the role of the judge, in most cases, to determine the facts. That is the for the jury to decide. It is possible that a judge could do a JNOV, AFTER the jury verdict.
If Palin won, it would give the Circuit Court the option of reinstating the verdict.
As it stands, this corrupt judge tied the hands of the Circuit Court. It is possible, but highly unlikely, the Circuit Court could rule that Palin proved her case and send it back down for the determination of damages. This is because if Palin won at trial, the NYT would appeal and the Circuit Court would have to decide based on the evidence anyway. As I said, that is pretty much not going to happen.
The Circuit Court will vacate the District Court’s dismissal and order a retrial.
“I believe this is a directed verdict.”
I thought the article indicate the judge was going to wait for the jury verdict. In that case, it would be JNOV.
But announcing his intention to do so before the verdict is just bizarre. So it may be that the press has misunderstood the difference between the two.
What the hell is this judge pulling?!?
Headline should read “Clinton Judge protects his friends and renders verdict for jury”
After the judge threw out the case on a technicality, we jurors talked with each other. Every single one of us felt like he had done the crime but would have had to vote “not guilty” because of lack of admissible evidence. It was frustrating.
JMOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.