In a breach of contract case, after the plaintiff has presented all of their evidence but before the defendant calls any witnesses, the defendant files a motion for judgment as a matter of law. Which of the following most accurately describes the standard a court must apply when deciding whether to grant the defendant’s motion?
The court must determine whether a reasonable jury could find in favor of the plaintiff when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to them.
The court must decide if the evidence offered by the plaintiff is sufficiently persuasive and reasonably credible.
The court must assess whether the plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence to establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.
The court must assess the credibility of witnesses alongside any reasonable inferences drawn from the plaintiff’s evidence.
A court deciding a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) evaluates whether a reasonable jury could find in favor of the non-moving party, here the plaintiff, based on the presented evidence. The court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and denies the motion if reasonable minds could differ. The incorrect answers either incorrectly frame the court's role as weighing evidence, require improbable conclusions about credibility, or overemphasize part of the analysis, such as witness credibility.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What does JMOL stand for and when is it used in court?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the significance of viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the difference between a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ and the standard applied for JMOL?