What is the effect of a proper JMOL motion under Rule 50?

• A. The court vacates the verdict and orders a new trial.
• B. The court enters judgment as a matter of law against the party that presented insufficient evidence to support its position.
• C. The court grants relief from judgment.
• D. The court remands the case for reconsideration of the jury's findings.

Answer: (B)

Judgment as a matter of law is about resolving the case on the merits when the evidence, as a matter of law, does not support a jury verdict for the party with the burden to prove the claim. When a proper Rule 50 motion is granted, the court determines that there is legally insufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to have found in the moving party’s favor, so the court enters judgment for that party instead of letting the jury’s verdict stand. In other words, the verdict is set aside because, even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, there is no legally adequate basis for the jury to have reached that result. This is why the correct outcome is judgment as a matter of law against the party whose position lacked sufficient evidence.

The other outcomes described would involve a different vehicle: vacating the verdict and ordering a new trial is typically a result of a Rule 59 motion or other post-trial remedy, not a Rule 50 JMOL grant. Relief from judgment and remanding for reconsideration of findings involve separate procedures that address different post-trial or procedural issues.