Opinion ID: 554885
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Denial of the Motion for Directed Verdict

Text: 16 A trial judge must direct a civil verdict where there can be but one reasonable conclusion as to the verdict. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 250, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2511, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). If reasonable minds could differ as to the import of the evidence, however, a verdict should not be directed. Id. at 250-51, 106 S.Ct. at 2511-12. In reviewing the lower court's denial of a motion for directed verdict, [t]he court must consider all the evidence available in the light most favorable to the non-movant, resolving all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the prevailing party below. Bell v. May, 866 F.2d at 455. Our ruling on the propriety of a res ipsa loquitur instruction is dispositive of this issue as well. Because there was enough evidence from which a jury, applying the res ipsa loquitur instruction, could have concluded that Otis was negligent, a directed verdict for the defendant would have been inappropriate. See Washington Sheraton Corp. v. Keeter, 239 A.2d 620, 622 (D.C.1968).