Conley
Conley v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
Opinion
Opinion
Armstrong, J.
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
At the close of plaintiffs’ case-in-chief at trial, defendants filed two motions for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a): Defendants’ Joint Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (the “Joint Motion”) and Defendant R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (“Reynolds’ Motion”). Plaintiffs have filed respective oppositions to the motions.
These motions are now before the Court. Having read and considered the papers submitted, having reviewed the transcript of the proceedings, and being fully informed, the Court DENIES the motions WITHOUT PREJUDICE to their being renewed after plaintiffs have been afforded an opportunity to correct the evi-dentiary deficiencies identified in this Order.
LEGAL STANDARD
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a)(1) provides:
In entertaining a motion for judgment as a matter of law, a federal court sitting in diversity is bound to apply state law in determining whether the evidence is sufficient to support a verdict in favor of the non-moving party. See In re Beverly Hills Fire Litig., 695 F.2d 207,…