A directed verdict is a procedure used by judges during trial to dismiss one or more claims when the party with the burden of proof (plaintiff) has failed to introduce evidence that is sufficient for a reasonable jury to find in favor of the party with the burden of proof. A directed verdict is like a summary judgment, but happens during trial rather than before trial.
In South Dakota, a directed verdict is a legal mechanism that a judge can use during a trial when the party with the burden of proof, typically the plaintiff, has not presented evidence that is strong enough for a reasonable jury to potentially rule in their favor. This procedure is governed by South Dakota's codified laws and rules of civil procedure. Specifically, under Rule 50 of the South Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure, after a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial and there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for that party, the court may resolve the issue against the party and may grant a directed verdict. This is different from a summary judgment, which is decided before a trial begins and is based on the argument that even if all the evidence were true, the opposing party would not have a legal basis to win the case. A directed verdict, on the other hand, occurs after the presentation of evidence has begun and is based on the insufficiency of the evidence presented at trial.