Rule 50.Judgment as a Matter of Law in a Jury Trial; Related Motion for a New Trial; Conditional Ruling

Group VI: Trials · Last amended March 1, 2011 · Last verified July 15, 2026

In one sentenceRule 50 lets the trial court take an issue away from the jury and enter judgment as a matter of law when the evidence would not let a reasonable jury rule for a party, lets the losing party renew that motion within 28 days after judgment, and requires the court to also rule — conditionally — on any linked motion for a new trial.

Full Text of Rule 50

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

(a) Judgment as a matter of law.

(1) In general. If a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial and the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the party on that issue, the court may:

(A) resolve the issue against the party; and

(B) grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law against the party on a claim or defense that, under the controlling law, can be maintained or defeated only with a favorable finding on that issue.

(2) Motion. A motion for judgment as a matter of law may be made at any time before the case is submitted to the jury. The motion must specify the judgment sought and the law and facts that entitle the moving party to the judgment.

(b) Renewing the motion after trial; Alternative motion for a new trial. If the court does not grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law made under subdivision (a), the court may later decide the legal questions raised by the motion. The moving party may renew its request for judgment as a matter of law by serving and filing a motion no later than 28 days after notice of entry of judgment or, if the motion addresses a jury issue not decided by a verdict, no later than 28 days after the jury was discharged. The moving party may alternatively request a new trial or join a motion for a new trial under Rule 59. In ruling on a renewed motion, the court may:

(1) if a verdict was returned:

(A) allow the judgment to stand,

(B) order a new trial, or

(2) if no verdict was returned:

(A) order a new trial, or

(B) direct entry of judgment as a matter of law.

(1) In general. If the court grants a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, it must also conditionally rule on any motion for a new trial by determining whether a new trial should be granted if the judgment is later vacated or reversed. The court must state the grounds for conditionally granting or denying the motion for a new trial.

(2) Effect of a conditional ruling. Conditionally granting the motion for a new trial does not affect the judgment's finality; if the judgment is reversed on appeal, the new trial must proceed unless the appellate court orders otherwise. If the motion for a new trial is conditionally denied, the appellee on appeal may assert error in that denial; if the judgment is reversed on appeal, the case must proceed as the appellate court orders.

(d) Time for a new-trial motion. Any motion for a new trial under Rule 59 by a party against whom judgment as a matter of law is rendered must be filed no later than 28 days after notice of entry of the judgment.

(e) Denying the motion for judgment as a matter of law; Reversal on appeal. If the court denies the motion for judgment as a matter of law, the prevailing party may, as appellee, assert grounds entitling it to a new trial should the appellate court conclude that the trial court erred in denying the motion. If the appellate court reverses the judgment, it may order a new trial, direct the trial court to determine whether a new trial should be granted, or direct the entry of judgment.

Explanatory Note

Rule 50 was amended, effective January 1, 1979; September 1, 1983; March 1, 1990; March 1, 1994; March 1, 1997; March 1, 1998; March 1, 2008; March 1, 2011.

Rule 50 was revised, effective March 1, 1994, to track the 1991 federal revision. The revision abandons the terminology "directed verdict" and "judgment notwithstanding the verdict." Instead, the terminology "judgment as a matter of law" is substituted.

When ruling on a motion for judgment as a matter of law, the court must decide whether the evidence is such that, without weighing the credibility of the witnesses or otherwise considering the weight of the evidence, a reasonable person could reach but one conclusion as to the verdict, or, otherwise stated, whether the evidence, viewed most favorably to the party against whom the motion is made, and giving that party the benefit of all reasonable inferences from the evidence, compels a result which no reasonable person might differ.

Under paragraph (a)(1) a party does not have to wait until the party with the burden of proof completes its case to move for dismissal. Either party may move for judgment as a matter of law anytime after the party with the burden of proof has been fully heard on an issue.

Rule 50 was amended, effective March 1, 2008, to track the 2006 amendments to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50. Paragraph (a)(1) was reorganized to improve clarity and paragraph (a)(2) was amended to allow a motion for judgment as a matter of law to be made at any time before the case is submitted to the jury.

Subdivision (b) was amended, effective March 1, 2008, to allow a party to renew a motion for judgment as a matter of law post-verdict without first renewing the motion at the close of the evidence. Under the amended language, a party who makes a motion that complies with subdivision (a) is allowed to renew the motion after the verdict. A 15-day time limit for renewing a motion addressing a jury issue not decided by the verdict was also added to subdivision (b).

Subdivision (b) was amended, effective March 1, 2011, to increase the time to renew a motion for judgment as a matter of law from 15 to 28 days after notice of entry of judgment.

Subdivision (d) was amended, effective March 1, 2011, to increase the time for a losing party's new trial motion from 15 to 28 days after notice of entry of the judgment.

Rule 50 was amended, effective March 1, 2011, in response to the December 1, 2007, revision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules.

Plain-English Summary

Rule 50(a) sets the standard: once a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial, if the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to rule for that party on the issue, the court may resolve the issue against the party and grant judgment as a matter of law on any claim or defense that, under the controlling law, stands or falls on a favorable finding on that issue. The motion can be made at any time before the case goes to the jury, and it must spell out the judgment sought along with the law and facts that support it. A party doesn't have to wait for the opposing side to finish its whole case — the motion is available as soon as the party with the burden of proof has been fully heard on the issue in question.

The rule's terminology carries real history. Effective March 1, 1994, North Dakota dropped the older labels “directed verdict” and “judgment notwithstanding the verdict,” replacing both with the single term “judgment as a matter of law,” tracking the federal rules' 1991 revision. So a search for a North Dakota “directed verdict” motion or a “JNOV” motion lands here — this is the modern name for both.

Rule 50(b) lets the moving party renew the motion after trial if the court didn't grant it the first time. The renewed motion must be served and filed no later than 28 days after notice of entry of judgment, or, if it addresses a jury issue the verdict never resolved, no later than 28 days after the jury was discharged. The party can also request a new trial as an alternative, or join a Rule 59 motion, and the court's options differ depending on whether the jury returned a verdict.

When the court grants a renewed motion, Rule 50(c) requires it to also rule conditionally on any new-trial motion — deciding, and stating the grounds for deciding, whether a new trial should happen if the judgment as a matter of law is later vacated or reversed. That conditional ruling doesn't touch the judgment's finality: if the judgment is reversed on appeal, the new trial goes forward unless the appellate court says otherwise, and if the new-trial motion was conditionally denied, the party who won below can still argue on appeal that the denial was wrong. Rule 50(d) sets the same 28-day deadline for a losing party's own new-trial motion, and Rule 50(e) covers the flip side — if the court denies judgment as a matter of law, the prevailing party may, as appellee, argue for a new trial if the appellate court decides the trial court should have granted the motion.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does a party have to show to win a motion for judgment as a matter of law in North Dakota?

Under Rule 50(a)(1), the party must show that, having been fully heard on an issue, a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to rule for the opposing party on that issue, and that the claim or defense at stake depends on a favorable finding on it.

Is this still called a “directed verdict” or “JNOV” motion in North Dakota?

No. Effective March 1, 1994, North Dakota replaced both older terms with “judgment as a matter of law,” tracking the 1991 federal revision. Rule 50's own title uses this modern terminology, and it covers what used to be called a directed verdict before the verdict and a judgment notwithstanding the verdict after one.

How long do I have to renew a motion for judgment as a matter of law after trial?

Rule 50(b) gives 28 days after notice of entry of judgment, or, if the motion addresses a jury issue the verdict didn't decide, 28 days after the jury was discharged.

If the court grants my renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, what happens to my alternative new-trial request?

Rule 50(c) requires the court to also rule conditionally on the new-trial motion, stating its grounds. If the judgment is later reversed on appeal, the new trial proceeds unless the appellate court orders otherwise.

Can I ask for a new trial at the same time I renew my motion for judgment as a matter of law?

Yes. Rule 50(b) lets the moving party alternatively request a new trial or join a motion for a new trial under Rule 59 when renewing the motion.

Source & verification. Rule text and the Explanatory Note are reproduced verbatim from the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the Supreme Court of North Dakota. Last verified July 15, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: nd judgment as a matter of law rulend jmol motionnorth dakota renewed motion for judgmentdirected verdict north dakota rule 50judgment notwithstanding the verdict nd28 day deadline renew jmol north dakota