Directed verdict

Directed verdict


Last updated 4 months agoFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)

This article relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources. More details and relevant discussion can be found on the talk page. (January 2012)

In a jury trial, a directed verdict is an order from the presiding judge to the jury to return a particular verdict. Typically, the judge orders a directed verdict after finding that no reasonable jury could reach a decision to the contrary. After a directed verdict, there is no longer any need for the jury to decide the case.



A judge may order a directed verdict as to an entire case or only to certain issues. While the motion is not often granted, it is routinely made as a means of preserving appeal rights later.



In a criminal case in the United States, a judge may only order a directed verdict for acquittal, for the ability to convict is reserved to the jury. In a civil action, a related concept to the directed verdict is that of a non-suit. A judge may decide to direct a verdict of not guilty if there is not a scintilla of evidence to prove a guilty verdict.



The phrase arose when judges actually directed a jury to leave the courtroom, deliberate, and return with only the verdict predetermined by the judge. At least one jury ignored this instruction and returned a contrary verdict, leading to quite an angry response from an appellate court.[citation needed] For most of modern judicial history, however, judges in the United States have directed a verdict without a need of a jury. This concept has largely been replaced in the American legal system with judgment as a matter of law.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_verdict