Legal Question in Business Law in California
Can a judge enter a directed verdict for plaintif?
When the defendants attorneys have clearly demonstrated intent to stall, delay, and otherwise hinder the progress of the trial is it possible for the judge to stop the trial and rule in favor of the plaintiffs? In this case, it is clear that the defendants are attempting to bankrupt the plaintiffs and thereby win by default. This case has taken over 4 years to get to court and now they are delaying jury selection and refusing to turn over discovery and other evidence to even though the judge has given them deadlines and ordered to stop delaying tactics. HELP!!!
4 Answers from Attorneys
Re: Can a judge enter a directed verdict for plaintif?
What you mean help, where's your attorney, sleeping, out to lunch. Judges don't let this happened just haphazardly, where's the judge. Are you representing yourself??? Not knowing the complexity of the case, any of the facts your question somewhat falls on deaf ears. Having practiced law for over 30 years and being in countless courtrooms on a regular basis for that period of time I understand your frustration but I don't understand your question. If you are represented by counsel what would you want any of us to do that can help you. There's no magic pill, there's no magic answer, oh yes, there is no magic.I have been practicing law in this legal area for over 30 years and understand your problem well. I practice in the S.F. Bay Area and if you wish to contact me call at 925-945-6000.
Re: Can a judge enter a directed verdict for plaintif?
yes, but not likely. Talk to your attorney about these issues; if you are in trial you need to communicate with him or her.
Joel Selik
Re: Can a judge enter a directed verdict for plaintif?
A judge cannot enter a directed verdict in favor of a plaintiff. He can punish the other side for its delaying tactics, and that punishment can include forbidding them to present any evidence. Such a punishment is only appropriate where the defendant's tactics are truly outrageous and where lesser sanctions have already proven insufficient to make them behave properly.
Even then, the plaintiff still has the burden of proof and must prove her case to the jury. The defendant will still be able to make opening and closing statements and object to your evidence, and may be allowed to cross examine your witnesses.
Re: Can a judge enter a directed verdict for plaintif?
Well, we have two differing answers; one of them must be wrong.
I believe the answer is yes, and here's my authority for the answer:
(1) In California state courts, the judge may grant any party's motion for a directed verdict. See Code of Civil Procedure section 630. The judge then instructs the jury as to the limits of its decision-making. If the jury refuses the court's instructions to return a verdict, the court may enter judgment without the jury's assent. Umstead v. Scofield Engineering & Construction Co. (1928) 203 Cal. 224 at page 226.
A plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict may be granted when the evidence supports the plaintiff's case and and no substantial evidence exists to support the defense. Walters v. Bank of America NT&SA (1937) 9 Cal.2d 46 at page 49.
Likewise, in the Federal court system there is a provision for the equivalent of a directed verdict, only it is called "judgment as a matter of law" and is provided for in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 50.