The order of the court granting a motion for a directed verdict is effective without any assent
of the jury.
Rule 240.Directed Verdicts
Article II. Rules on Civil Proceedings in the Trial Court · Part F. Trials · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 20, 2026
In one sentenceRule 240 confirms that a court’s order directing a verdict takes effect on its own, without any need for the jury to agree.
Full Text of Ill. S. Ct. R. 240
Plain-English Summary
Rule 240 is a single, narrow rule with an outsized effect. When a judge grants a motion for a directed verdict, that order is effective the moment it is entered. The jury does not have to assent to it, sign off on it, or do anything at all.
Before this rule, some courts kept an old formality alive: even after directing a verdict, the judge would have the jury return a verdict reflecting the court’s ruling, as if the jury had agreed to it. Rule 240 does away with that ritual. A directed verdict works because the judge, not the jury, has decided the outcome, and the rule says so plainly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the jury have to agree to a directed verdict?
No, Rule 240 makes clear the court’s order is effective without any assent from the jury.
What is a directed verdict?
It is a ruling the judge makes, taking the decision away from the jury because the evidence permits only one outcome as a matter of law.
Why was Rule 240 adopted?
It eliminated an old, empty formality of having the jury formally return a verdict that only restated what the judge had already decided.
Does Rule 240 set the standard for when a directed verdict is proper?
No, the rule only addresses the effect of the order once granted; it does not set the legal standard for granting one.
Is a directed verdict the same thing as a judgment notwithstanding the verdict?
They are related but distinct: a directed verdict happens before the jury deliberates, while a judgment notwithstanding the verdict comes after the jury has already returned one.
Committee Comments
This new rule, taken from Rule 50(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended in 1963, eliminates an archaic and futile ceremony. See Kaplan, Amendments of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 1961-63 (II), 77 Harv. L. Rev. 801, 823 (1964).
Source & verification. Rule text, official Committee Comments, and
amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Illinois Supreme Court Rules,
promulgated by the Supreme Court of Illinois. Last verified July 20, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: directed verdictjudgment notwithstanding the verdictJNOVmotion for directed verdictcourt directs a verdictjudgment as a matter of lawJMOL