Rule 50.Dispositive trial motions

Title VI: Alternative Dispute Resolution and Trial · Last amended July 1, 2016 · Last verified July 14, 2026

In one sentenceRule 50 lets a party move for a directed verdict before the case goes to the jury and, whether or not that motion was made, move afterward for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), setting the deadline for the JNOV motion, its required pairing with an alternative new-trial motion, and how the whole sequence carries over to appeal.

Full Text of Rule 50

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b)

(a) Motion for directed verdict. A motion for a directed verdict must state the specific grounds for the motion. A party who moves for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence offered by an opponent may offer evidence in the event that the motion is not granted, without having reserved the right to do so and to the same extent as if the motion had not been made. A motion for a directed verdict which is not granted is not a waiver of trial by jury even though all parties to the action have moved for directed verdicts. The order of the court granting a motion for a directed verdict is effective without the agreement of the jury.

(b) Motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

(1) Timing. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict must be served not later than 14 days after entry of the judgment and may be made whether or not the party moved for a directed verdict. If a verdict was not returned a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict must be served not later than 14 days after discharge of the jury.

(2) Joined with motion for new trial. A motion for a new trial may be joined with a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or a new trial may be requested in the alternative, in conformance with the requirements of Rule 59(a). A motion to set aside or otherwise nullify a verdict or for a new trial includes a motion notwithstanding the verdict as an alternative. If the jury returns a verdict, the court may allow the judgment to stand or may reopen the judgment and either order a new trial or direct the entry of judgment. If the jury does not return a verdict, the court may direct the entry of judgment or may order a new trial.

(3) Preservation of motion for appellate review. The failure of a party to move for a directed verdict, for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial does not preclude appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence when proper assignment of error is made in the appellate court.

(4) Conditional ruling.

(A) Procedure. If the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is granted, the court must rule on the motion for new trial by determining whether it should be granted if the judgment is later vacated or reversed. If the motion for new trial is conditionally granted, the court must specify the grounds, and the order does not affect the finality of the judgment.

(B) After Appeal. If the motion for new trial has been conditionally denied and the judgment is reversed on appeal, subsequent proceedings must be in accordance with the order of the appellate court. An appeal from a judgment granting or denying a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict presents for review all reviewable error against either the appellant or respondent.

(C) Effect on prevailing party. The party whose verdict has been set aside on motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict may, not later than 14 days after entry of judgment, serve a motion for a new trial, which must be conditionally granted or denied, with the consequences stated above.

(D) Failure to make motion. Any party who fails to make a motion for a new trial as provided in this subsection waives the right to apply for a new trial.

(5) Denial of motion. If the court denies the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the party who prevailed on that motion may, as respondent on appeal, assert grounds entitling that party to a new trial in the event the appellate court concludes that the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. If the appellate court reverses the judgment, nothing in this rule precludes it from determining that the respondent is entitled to a new trial, or from directing the trial court to determine whether a new trial will be granted.

End

Amendment History

(Adopted March 1, 2016, effective July 1, 2016.)

Plain-English Summary

Rule 50 gives Idaho civil litigants two related tools, and the rule still uses their traditional names rather than the newer "judgment as a matter of law" label. Subsection (a) is the motion for a directed verdict: a party asks the court, before the case reaches the jury, to rule that the evidence only supports one outcome, and the motion has to state specific grounds. Making the motion at the close of an opponent's evidence does not lock a party into resting — if the motion is denied, that party can still put on its own evidence as though it had never moved at all. And moving for a directed verdict, even if every party in the case does so, does not waive anyone's right to a jury trial. If the court grants the motion, its ruling takes effect without needing the jury's agreement.

Subsection (b) covers the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict — a JNOV — made after the jury has acted, or failed to. It must be served within 14 days after judgment is entered, or within 14 days after the jury is discharged if no verdict came back, and a party can bring it whether or not it moved for a directed verdict earlier. A JNOV motion is often joined with, or made as an alternative to, a motion for a new trial under Rule 59(a). When a court grants the JNOV motion, it also has to conditionally rule on the new-trial motion — deciding whether a new trial should happen if the JNOV judgment gets vacated or reversed on appeal — and that conditional ruling does not affect the finality of the judgment. A party whose verdict got set aside by a JNOV ruling gets its own 14 days to move for a new trial, and skipping that step waives the right to ask for one.

The rule also protects appellate review regardless of what motions got filed below. Failing to move for a directed verdict, a JNOV, or a new trial does not block an appellate court from reviewing whether the evidence was sufficient, as long as the error is properly assigned on appeal. And if a court denies a JNOV motion, the party who won that ruling can still argue, as the respondent on appeal, that it deserves a new trial if the appellate court decides the trial court was wrong to deny the JNOV — and the appellate court can grant that relief or send the question back to the trial court.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a motion for a directed verdict under Idaho's rules?

A request, made before the case goes to the jury, that the court rule as a matter of law that the evidence supports only one outcome. The motion must state specific grounds, and if the court denies it, the moving party can still present its own evidence as if the motion had never been made.

What is a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), and when does it have to be filed?

A JNOV motion asks the court to enter judgment contrary to the jury's verdict after the jury has ruled, or after it has been discharged without reaching one. It must be served within 14 days of the judgment's entry, or within 14 days of the jury's discharge if there was no verdict.

Do I have to move for a directed verdict before I can move for JNOV?

No. Rule 50(b)(1) allows a JNOV motion whether or not the party moved for a directed verdict earlier in the trial.

What does it mean for a court to "conditionally" grant or deny a new trial along with a JNOV ruling?

When a court grants a JNOV motion, it must also decide, at the same time, whether a new trial should be granted if the JNOV judgment is later vacated or reversed on appeal. That conditional ruling on the alternative new-trial motion does not change whether the JNOV judgment itself is final for appeal purposes.

Can I still get appellate review of the evidence if I never moved for a directed verdict, JNOV, or a new trial?

Yes. Rule 50(b)(3) preserves appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence even without any of those motions, as long as the issue is properly raised as an assignment of error on appeal.

Source & verification. Rule text are reproduced verbatim from the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the Supreme Court of Idaho. Last verified July 14, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: directed verdict idahojnov idahojmol idahojudgment notwithstanding the verdict idahomotion for a directed verdict idahomotion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict idahoidaho rule 50 dispositive trial motions