Defendant’s Case-in-Chief; Motions Made After Defendant’s Case-in-Chief; Rebuttal and Surrebuttal Self-Quiz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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?
Choice 1 To present evidence that contests the plaintiff’s evidence.
Choice 2 To present evidence that will prove its affirmative defenses.
Choice 3 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?
Choice 1 The court should deny John’s motion because Ralph has a valid affirmative defense.
Choice 2 The court should deny John’s motion because the court has the discretion to deny the motion this late in the trial process.
Choice 3 The court should deny John’s motion because the court has the discretion to grant or deny this type of motion at any time.
Choice 4 The court should grant John’s motion.

© 2003 - 2018 National Paralegal College