benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU / A protester brought an action in federal court against a police officer,…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

A protester brought an action in federal court against a police officer, alleging that the officerÕs use of force in arresting the protester violated the protesterÕs federal civil rights. During the jury trial, eyewitnesses gave conflicting testimony on the arrest. At the close of evidence, the protester moved for judgment as a matter of law, which the court denied. The court instructed the jury that the protesterÕs burden of proof was clear and convincing evidence, rather than the correct burden of preponderance of the evidence. The jury returned a verdict for the officer, and the court entered judgment accordingly. What is the protesterÕs best option for challenging the judgment?

choices

  1. Seek a new trial, because the jury instruction affected the protesterÕs substantial rights.
  2. Seek a new trial, because the verdict was against the clear weight of the evidence.
  3. Seek judgment as a matter of law, because the jury did not have legally sufficient evidence to find for the officer.
  4. Seek judgment as a matter of law, because the juryÕs findings were clearly erroneous.

subject

professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

Official source

initial import