Mike brings an action against Dr. Thompson for medical malpractice. At the close of the plaintiff’s case-in-chief, the defendant moves for summary judgment. Because the judge denies the defendant’s motion, Dr. Thompson’s attorney begins his case-in-chief. Which of the following is an improper purpose for Dr. Thompson’s case-in-chief?

To present evidence that contests the plaintiff’s evidence.
To present evidence that will prove its affirmative defenses.
To present evidence against the plaintiff pertaining to a claim the defendant had not pled prior to the defendant’s case-in-chief.

John sued Ralph in Texarkana state court over a battery claim. John alleged that Ralph attacked him without provocation in a bar on August 1, 2003. He provided factual evidence that supported the battery claim. Ralph countered John’s battery claim by arguing that he had an affirmative defense of self-defense. However, Ralph failed to provide any evidentiary support of the affirmative defense. John filed a motion for directed verdict (also known as a motion for judgment as a matter of law). How should the court rule on John’s motion?

The court should deny John’s motion because Ralph has a valid affirmative defense.
The court should deny John’s motion because the court has the discretion to deny the motion this late in the trial process.
The court should deny John’s motion because the court has the discretion to grant or deny this type of motion at any time.
The court should grant John’s motion.