## Facts

- Cone sued West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. for trespass and wrongful cutting of timber on land Cone claimed to own and possess, seeking $25,000 in damages.
- The defendant removed the action to federal district court based on diversity jurisdiction.
- The defendant denied Cone’s title and possession, making both essential elements Cone had to prove at trial.
- After the evidence closed, the defendant moved for a directed verdict for failure of proof on title and possession; the district court denied the motion.
- The jury returned a verdict for Cone for $15,000, and judgment was entered on the verdict.
- The defendant sought a new trial based on newly discovered evidence; the district court denied that motion.
- The defendant did not file a timely post-verdict motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b).
- The court of appeals held Cone’s proof of title and possession legally insufficient (after excluding certain title evidence as improperly admitted), reversed, and directed entry of judgment for the defendant.

## Issues

1. Whether, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b), a federal court of appeals may direct entry of judgment notwithstanding the verdict for a party that did not file a timely post-verdict Rule 50(b) motion in the district court.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and remanded.
- The Court held that, without a timely Rule 50(b) motion in the district court, the court of appeals lacked authority to direct entry of judgment notwithstanding the verdict for the defendant.
- The Court limited its review to the federal procedural question and did not decide the underlying state-law merits of trespass, title, or possession.

## Legal Principles

- A party whose motion for a directed verdict was denied must file a timely post-verdict Rule 50(b) motion in the district court to preserve the ability to seek judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
- Absent a Rule 50(b) motion, an appellate court is precluded from ordering entry of judgment contrary to the jury’s verdict on sufficiency-of-the-evidence grounds.
- Rule 50(b) functions to protect the jury’s role and to ensure the trial court has the first opportunity to assess the legal sufficiency of the evidence before appellate intervention.

## Conclusion

The Court held that Rule 50(b) makes a timely post-verdict motion in the district court a prerequisite to appellate entry of judgment notwithstanding the verdict; because the defendant did not file such a motion, the appellate court could not direct judgment for the defendant, and the case was remanded.


Cone v. W. Va. Pulp & Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212 (1947)