Question

Barnum seeks to buy real estate in Manhattan from Bailey, but actions by Ringling prevent the transaction. Barnum therefore sues Ringling for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage. After conducting discovery, Ringling thinks that the undisputed facts show that, as a matter of law, Barnum cannot prove one of the elements of tortious interference. Which motion can allow Ringling to end the litigation without having to go to trial?

(A) Motion for summary judgment
(B) Motion for directed verdict
(C) Motion for new trial
(D) None of the above, because once the trial has started, then no motion can prevent the matter from reaching the jury

Answer 1

Answer:

Motion for directed verdict

Explanation:

Motion of Directed Verdict may is known as a plead made by the party in the court in order to issue directed verdict. A directed verdict is a ruling entered by a trial judge after determining that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to reach a different conclusion. 

  In the Barnum situation, he files a case in the court against Ringling but later Ringling realizes that Barnum cannot produce any evidence for the wrong thing Ringling has done in the court. Thus Ringling can appeal for motion for directed verdict in the court, the trial can end and does not need to go before the jury.