Skip to main content

Is it common for the plaintiff to move for JMOL after the defense has rested in a medical malpractice case?

Miami, FL |

I know it almost certain that the defense will move for judgement as a matter of law after plaintiff's case and again after defense's case, but do you (as in you pesonally you is reading this!) usually move for judgement as a matter of law for the plaintiff after the defense rests. Since medical malpractice has both the issues of negligence and damages, can you move for JMOL just on the negligence portion?

+ Read More

Attorney answers 3


You can make any valid motion you want during a trial. However, most judges are leery of appellate courts if they are appealed, so they are usually reluctant to make this type of ruling. They would rather err of the side of letting it go to the jury.

These types of motions are very fact specific so it is impossible to give you a yes/no answer without being privy to the intricacies of your case.

DISCLAIMER: David J. McCormick is licensed to practice law in the State of Wisconsin and this answer is being provided for informational purposes only because the laws of your jurisdiction may differ. This answer based on general legal principles and is not intended for the purpose of providing specific legal advice or opinions. Under no circumstances does this answer constitute the establishment of an attorney-client relationship.


It is common for both sides to move for directed verdict. It is often denied but preserves appellate rights


Yes, one very commonly might do so (both Plaintiff and Defendant(s)), will typically move for directed verdict at the close of first the Plaintiff's case, and then again, at the close of the Defendant(s)'s case(s); however, it is typically done so in a fairly perfunctory manner and often to merely preserve appellate issues.

If one thought that this type of Motion was likely to actually result in a Directed Verdict, the issue would have been vigorously raised via a motion for summary judgment at the close of discovery during the pendency of the action. This is a very rare scenario in which one might expect to prevail. Typically an action in which the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor is applicable is the sort in which one might expect reasonably to prevail. A good example is a surgical instrument left in the body, for example, and further proof that the instrument count was never conducted, or at least not in conformity with protocol and the more importantly the community standard of care.

And yes, one can move only as to liability, of course. Typically when the motion is made that is the issue to which it is primarily if not completely directed.

We are pleased to offer a free thirty (30) minute initial telephone consultation, or, if possible, will attempt to schedule a free thirty (30) minute initial office consultation. Neither this offer of a free initial consultation, nor the mere fact that the initial consultation may have ultimately been conducted, whether telephonically or at our office location, should be construed; assumed; interpreted; or understood by any individual who was granted a free initial consultation for which no consideration of any sort whatsoever was tendered, to have formed or created an attorney-client relationship, or to have created any obligations owed by the attorney or attorney's firm to any individual who was given a free initial consultation, by the mere undertaking of the free initial consultation for which no consideration of any sort was tendered to attorney or attorney's firm. The formation of an attorney-client relationship occurs through the process of negotiation between the prospective parties, the individual seeking legal representation, and the attorney, acting individually, or as an agent of a firm (the capacity in which the attorney is acting shall be disclosed to prospective client, if negotiations for legal representation in exchange for good and valuable consideration are undertaken by the prospective client and the attorney. If agreement is reached by and between the parties for legal representation after the mutually satisfactory negotiation of the agreement for legal representation, and all of its individual terms; the scope of representation to be provided by the attorney to the prospective client has been delineated to the mutual satisfaction of the parties; the manner of payment of good and valuable consideration by the prospective client to the attorney has been determined; and it has been conceded by the parties that all of those factors upon which agreement had been reached by the parties and which were recited herein, had been agreed upon by the parties only after careful consideration and sufficient review of the document styled Agreement for Legal Representation, and after it has likewise been conceded by the parties that each respectively had been presented with the opportunity to have the document reviewed independently by each respective party's personal attorney, or any other attorney of his or her chooosing. If the Agreement for Legal Representation contains terms regarding contingency fee agreement or agreements for payment to the attorney for all or a portion of his or her services and legal representation on behalf of the Client, Client concedes that he or she has been presented with an additional document entitled "Statement of Client's Rights", which is a document created by the Florida Bar and approved for use in matters in which payment in full or part, is tendered by contingency fee agreement. Please note that any commentary or response offered through this site is based on the limited set of facts and background data supplied by the individual framing the question and would in all likelihood require more investigation before a complete response could properly be framed to thoroughly answer the question posed. No attorney-client relationship is, or should be presumed to be, formed through the comments or responses provided to the individual posing the question, as a courtesy, here, through this forum, nor should any other duties or obligations be construed; assumed; or otherwise be inferred to exist and/or owed to the individual who posed the question by the attorney who provided the best guidance possible to said individual under the circumstances presented as they were, including the unreasonable assumption that a full and thorough legal analysis of an individual's situation could be formulated simply based on the minute portion of the entirety of the facts and circumstances surrounding any legal matter, which could in no manner possibly be presented here in such a form which would allow for a thorough analysis, evaluation, or legal opinion to be formed by the Attorney.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer