ORCP 63

 

      See also annotations under ORS 18.140 in permanent edition.

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

Under former similar statute (ORS 18.140)

 

      Judgment notwithstanding verdict was improperly granted where its basis had not been brought to trial court’s attention in earlier motion for directed verdict. Johnson v. Smith, 24 Or App 621, 546 P2d 1087 (1976)

 

      Term “on motion” requires that motion be before the court before it can enter judgment notwithstanding verdict or judgment in lieu of previously entered judgment, and court cannot enter such judgment on its own motion. Bella v. Aurora Air, Inc., 279 Or 13, 566 P2d 489 (1977)

 

In general

 

      Unless order granting judgment n.o.v. is heard and determined within 55 days it is void if entered after deadline inadvertently, intentionally or because of misleading conduct of counsel. Micek v. LeMaster, 71 Or App 361, 692 P2d 652 (1984), Sup Ct review denied

 

      Where court clerk’s negligent failure to mail required notice resulted in delay of appeal, and consequently caused greater amount of interest to accrue against plaintiff than if there had been no delay, plaintiff could recover interest attributable to delay in action for negligence. Simpson v. State of Oregon, 105 Or App 523, 805 P2d 734 (1991)

 

      Standard of appellate review for action mixing claim for legal and equitable relief is that judgment may be upheld only if no evidence exists to support jury verdict. Wooton v. Viking Distributing Co., Inc., 136 Or App 56, 899 P2d 1219 (1995), Sup Ct review denied

 

      Judicial doctrine requiring new trial where uncertainty exists whether jury verdict was rendered on appropriate or inappropriate basis does not apply where failure to join motion for new trial with motion for J.N.O.V. has resulted in waiver. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Tualatin Tire & Auto, 322 Or 406, 908 P2d 300 (1995), modified 325 Or 46, 932 P2d 1141 (1997)

 

      Motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict cannot be granted on grounds not previously asserted in motion for directed verdict. Hamilton v. Lane County, 204 Or App 147, 129 P3d 235 (2006)

 

      Where directed verdict issue was raised and determined by court sua sponte, failure of party to move for directed verdict precluded subsequent entry of judgment notwithstanding verdict. Gritzbaugh Main Street Properties, LLC v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 205 Or App 640, 135 P3d 345 (2006), on reconsideration 207 Or App 628, 142 P3d 514 (2006), Sup Ct review denied

 

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS

 

In general

 

      78 OLR 587 (1999)