Opinion ID: 2640085
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: daines' day in court

Text: ¶45 Daines claims that he was denied his day in court by the trial court's directed verdicts. We disagree. In order to succeed in his claim, Daines must demonstrate that his claims have not been adjudicated on the merits. See, e.g., Miller v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 2002 UT 6, ¶¶ 65-66, 44 P.3d 663. The record clearly indicates the opposite. ¶46 We have held that a day in court means that each party shall be afforded the opportunity to present claims and defenses, and have them properly adjudicated on the merits according to the facts and the law. Id. ¶ 42 (footnote omitted). The `merits' of a case are `the elements or grounds of a claim or defense.' Blue Skies Alliance v. Tex. Comm'n on Envtl. Quality, 265 F.App'x 203, 207 (5th Cir. 2008) (quoting Black's Law Dictionary 1010 (8th ed. 2004). With regard to a judgment on the merits, we have clarified our standard by stating that a judgment on the merits may be made at any stage of the litigation, so long as the district court rendered judgment based upon a proper application of the relevant law to the facts of the case. [10] Miller, 2002 UT 6, ¶ 42 n. 6. ¶47 Daines received rulings on the elements and grounds of his claim based on the trial court's proper application of the relevant law to the facts of the case. The directed verdicts were not rendered until after Daines presented his entire case to the court. It was not until after Daines indicated that he would not call any more witnesses that the court heard motions for directed verdicts by ASC and Vincent. The record indicates that the court carefully listened to the testimony and evidence during Daines' presentation. After Daines' presentation of evidence the court noted, I don't think you've proven any malfeasance or anything by way of breach of contract on Mr. Vincent. The trial court then allowed Daines the opportunity to address the court's concerns. While considering directed verdicts, the court carefully sought through the record to identify even a scintilla of evidence that would support [Daines'] claim that could go to the jury. It was only after the court's deliberation on Daines' presentation and arguments on the merits that it granted the directed verdicts based on application of the appropriate law to each of Daines' claims. The trial court's directed verdicts did not deny Daines his day in court. To the contrary, the record indicates that the trial court was careful to ensure it applied the appropriate law to the facts presented by Daines before rendering its judgment.