27-565

of the Party Pleading it, and so clearly ex- pressed that no reasonable construction can alter its meaning, a Verdict will afford no help. A more simple statement of the Rule is that a Verdict will Cure the Defective Statement of a Title, but Not the Statement of a Defective Title.

The Verdict must be for the Party in whose favor the implication is to be made, for it is in consequence of the Verdict, and to sup- port it, that the Court is induced to put a Liberal Construction upon the Allegations on the Record.52

308. When a Plea is Good in Form, but shows no valid Answer to the Merits of the Ac- tion, the Court will order Judgment for the plaintiff, Notwithstanding a Verdict in favor of the defendant. The Motion will now be Granted in favor of a defendant, where the plaintiff’s Pleadings are not sufficient to sup- port a Judgment upon a Verdict in his favor.

IN a certain class of cases, where the Party who has secured a Verdict, is not entitled to a Judgment upon it, the Court may not only Arrest the Judgment in pur- suance of the Verdict, but may give Judg- ment in Chief, Non Obstante Veredicto; that is, in favor of the Party against whom the Verdict was found. But such a course of procedure was taken only in clear cases where there was no doubt that the Party, against whom the Issue was found, was en- titled to Judgment upon the Whole Record.53 This was, in effect, a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, and was granted, for ex- ample, where a Plea in Bar confessed a good Declaration, but the matter Alleged in Avoid- ance constituted no Legal Defense. In such

a situation, as the right of the plaintiff to recover had been confessed by the Defective Plea, it would amount to a denial of Justice to withhold from the plaintiff a Judgment- in-Chief.

It should be observed that in such a case the Judgment is in reality grounded upon the Confession made in the Plea, without re- gard to the Verdict, as the Verdict decides nothing however it may go.54

Formerly, the Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto, was granted only where it Appeared upon the Record that the plain- tiff was entitled to Judgment Notwithstand- ing the Verdict for the defendant; and the defendant was limited to a Motion in Arrest of Judgment, and could not obtain a Judg- ment after a Verdict for the plaintiff upon a Bad Declaration.55 But, under Modern Law, the Motion was also held available by some American Courts in favor of a defendant, where the plaintiff’s Pleadings were not suf- ficient to support a Judgment in his favor.56

It has been urged that this difference is unsubstantial, since a Judgment for the de- fendant without regard to the Verdict is in fact an Arrest of Judgment.57 But accord- ing to Keigwin,58 the difference is not alto- gether unsubstantial, as an Arrest of Judg- ment is by no means equivalent to the Entry of Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto. He ob-

Gould, A Treatise on the Principles of Pleading, Pt. II, Procedure, c. V, Arrest of Judgment and Re- pleader, 171, 172 (6th ed. by Will, Albany, 1909).