Why might a motion for judgment as a matter of law be denied?

A motion for judgment as a matter of law, often made in a civil trial, requests the court to rule that no reasonable jury could reach a different verdict based on the evidence presented. One of the fundamental aspects of such a motion is that the procedural requirements must be correctly followed for the motion to be considered. If the procedural aspects are not adhered to — such as timing, format, or specificity of the motion — the court may deny the motion, regardless of the merits of the case or the evidence presented.

While it might seem that a lack of evidence or a jury’s decision could lead to denial, those conditions pertain more to the substantive evaluation of the case rather than procedural validity. The court first examines whether the motion is valid from a procedural standpoint before delving into the aspects of evidence or existing jury decisions. Thus, ensuring proper procedural requirements were met is crucial for the motion to even be considered, making it a valid reason for denial.