Court Opinion

ID: 9444209
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:45:55.054295+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:46.245177
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
Urging that: “the Court failed to note and consider that appellant did make a motion for a directed verdict R 31 R 248. Also that there was claim below that the verdict was without evidence to support it R 40”; appellant seeks a rehearing.
*849The Court did read and consider the whole record in connection with appellant’s motion to affirm, and, reading and considering it, it took particular note of Record, pages 31 1 and 248,2 and, on the basis thereof, determined, as stated in its opinion, that “appellant’s attack upon the verdict, as without support in the evidence, presents nothing for our consideration because there was no motion for a directed verdict and no claim below that the verdict was without evidence to support it, and besides the record contains abundant evidence in its support.”
This determination was based on Rule 50, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.,3 and the fact that not only were no grounds stated in connection with the completely perfunctory action shown in the record on the pages referred to, but it cannot be determined therefrom with any certainty just what defendant was moving for.
Record, page 40, to which petitioner refers, shows the motion for new trial. This occurring after verdict is not relevant on the point under discussion. In addition, a reference to it will show that the claim there made was not that the verdict was without support in the evidence but that it was against the clear weight of the evidence. Besides, as was clearly pointed out in the opinion, an examination of the record showed there was no basis whatever in the evidence for the claim that a verdict should be instructed.
The petition for rehearing is denied.

. “After the introduction of all the plaintiffs’ evidence, and the introduction of the defendant’s evidence, tile plaintiffs move the Court for a directed verdict in this cause, and for a directed verdict on counter-claim of defendant, and defendant moves the Court for a directed verdict on counter-claim of amendment, and said motions being considered and understood by the Court, they are hereby overruled and denied. Whereupon, the plaintiffs meve the court by written motion for a directed verdict and for a directed on counter-claim of defendant, as amended, and said motions being considered and understood by the court same are hereby overruled and denied.”

. “Mr. Bishop: ‘Before the case closes, Tour Honor, we want to ask for a directed verdict for the plaintiff and also a directed verdict on the counter-claim.’
“The Court: ‘Do you make the same motion gentlemen for the defendant?’
“Mr. Durrence: ‘Yes, sir. We do.’
“The Court: ‘Well, I overrule both of the motions and let it go to the jury. Bring the jury in gentlemen.’ ”

. Rule 50. Motion for a Directed Verdict.
“ * * * A motion for a directed verdict shall state the specific grounds therefor.”