Delaware Trial Handbook § 23:3. INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

In civil non-jury cases, after the close of the plaintiff’s case, the defendant may move for an involuntary dismissal of the plaintiff’s case on the ground that, upon the facts and the law, the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. The court, as the trier of fact in such cases, may then determine the facts and render judgment against the plaintiff.28 The Court is not obliged to consider the plaintiff’s evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff as it would have to do in a jury trial. The court may weigh and evaluate the evidence and rule for the defendant as a matter of fact and is not limited to ruling on the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence as a matter of law.29

The purpose of this rule is to permit the Court, sitting as a trier of the facts without a jury, to avoid further needless proceedings and enter judgment on the merits in favor of the defendant in the event that it appears clear to the trial judge, after weighing the plaintiff’s evidence, that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief. It is intended as a tool to expedite the course of litigation in an appropriate case; it is not intended to require a trial judge sitting without a jury to rule on the status of the plaintiff’s evidence at the conclusion of the presentation of his case.29.1  However, a motion under Rule 41(b) is granted sparingly and only in unusually clear cases.29.2

A court can defer ruling on a motion for involuntary dismissal until the close of all the evidence.30  If it does so, the court may consider all of the evidence adduced at trial in reaching its ultimate decision on the merits.31 If the court denies the motion at the end of the plaintiff’s case, the defendant may then offer its evidence.32 However, presenting evidence after a denail of a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 41(b) constitutes a waiver of the motion for appeal purposes.32.1

A denial of a motion for involuntary dismissal constitutes only a tentative and inconclusive ruling on the quantum of the plaintiff’s evidence. It does not preclude the trial judge from later making considered findings and determinations not altogether consistent with the prior tentative ruling.33

28. Ch. Ct. R. 41(b); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b); Comm. Pls. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b); Fam. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b).

29. Savitch v. Necastro, 426 A.2d 324, 326 (Del. 1981); Weinberger v. UOP, Inc., C.A. No. 5642, slip op. at 3, Brown, V.C. (Del. Ch. June 23, 1980). But see In re Appraisal of Enstar Corp., 593 A.2d 543, 553 (Del. Ch. 1991), rev’d on other grounds, 604 A.2d 404 (Del. 1992) (on motion for involuntary dismissal, trial court must determine whether the evidence would be sufficient to go to the jury if the case were a jury case).

29.1. Weinberger v. UOP, Inc., C.A. No. 5642, slip op. at 3, Brown, V.C. (Del. Ch. June 23, 1980).

29.2.  Stearns v. Division of Family Services, 23 A.3d 137, 143-44 (Del. 2011).

30. Ch. Ct. R. 41(b); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b); Comm. Pls. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b); Fam. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b).

31. In re Appraisal of Enstar Corp., 593 A.2d 543, 554 (Del. Ch. 1991), rev’d on other grounds, 604 A.2d 404 (Del. 1992).

32. Ch. Ct. R. 41(b); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b); Comm. Pls. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b); Fam. Ct. Civ. R. 41(b).

32.1.  Stearns v. Division of Family Services, 23 A.3d 137, 144 (Del. 2011).

33. Weinberger v. UOP, Inc., C.A. No. 5642, slip op. at 4-5, Brown, V.C. (Del. Ch. June 23, 1980).

© 2010  David L. Finger