In a jury trial, a directed verdict is an order from the presiding judge to the jury to return a particular verdict. Typically, the judge orders a directed verdict after finding that no reasonable jury could reach a decision to the contrary. After a directed verdict, there is no longer any need for the jury to decide the case.
A judge may order a directed verdict as to an entire case or only to certain issues. While a motion from a party to impose a directed verdict is not often granted, it is routinely made as a means of preserving appeal rights later.
In a criminal case in the United States, a judge may order a directed verdict only for acquittal, for the ability to convict is reserved to the jury. In a civil action, a related concept to the directed verdict is that of a non-suit. A judge may decide to direct a verdict of not guilty if there is not a scintilla of evidence to prove a guilty verdict.
This concept has largely been replaced in the American legal system with judgment as a matter of law.
Famous quotes containing the words directed and/or verdict:
“A lover is never a completely self-reliant person viewing the world through his own eyes, but a hostage to a certain delusion. He becomes a perjurer, all his thoughts and emotions being directed with reference, not to an accurate and just appraisal of the real world but rather to the safety and exaltation of his loved one, and the madness with which he pursues her, transmogrifying his attention, blinds him like a victim.”
—Alexander Theroux (b. 1940)
“Americans are notorious for looking to their children for approval. How our children turn out and what they think of us has become the “final judgment” on our lives. . . . We imagine that the rising generation is rendering history’s verdict on us. We may resent children simply because we expect a harsh judgment from them.”
—C. John Sommerville (20th century)