A verdict ordered by a trial judge if the plaintiff fails to present a prima facie case or if the defendant fails to present a necessary defense.

A verdict ordered by a trial judge if the plaintiff fails to present a prima facie case or if the defendant fails to present a necessary defense.

• A. Pattern jury instructions
• B. Verdict
• C. Mistrial
• D. Directed verdict

Answer: (D)

A directed verdict is a judge’s ruling that, based on the evidence presented, no reasonable jury could find for one side, so the judge directs a verdict for the other side. This occurs when the plaintiff hasn’t shown a prima facie case—the essential facts needed to support the claim—or when the defendant hasn’t presented a legally sufficient defense, leaving no viable basis for liability. In this situation, the judge decides the outcome to avoid sending an unproven or legally deficient case to the jury for deliberation. It’s different from a verdict, which is decided by the jury after deliberation; it’s also different from a mistrial, which ends or invalidates a trial for reasons like error or deadlock, and from pattern jury instructions, which are standard legal instructions given to juries.

A directed verdict is a judge’s ruling that, based on the evidence presented, no reasonable jury could find for one side, so the judge directs a verdict for the other side. This occurs when the plaintiff hasn’t shown a prima facie case—the essential facts needed to support the claim—or when the defendant hasn’t presented a legally sufficient defense, leaving no viable basis for liability. In this situation, the judge decides the outcome to avoid sending an unproven or legally deficient case to the jury for deliberation. It’s different from a verdict, which is decided by the jury after deliberation; it’s also different from a mistrial, which ends or invalidates a trial for reasons like error or deadlock, and from pattern jury instructions, which are standard legal instructions given to juries.