标题：Capping Judicial Discretion: Drawing the Line for Oregon Trial Judges in Granting Motions for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or a New Trial in Civil Cases
摘要：The vast and complex system of law which governs the United States consists of far more than massive sets ofrules definitively controlling decisions or judgments. Discretion in the American legal system is prevalent in allcomponents of the court. Judges, juries, and attorneys all have a significant amount of discretion at the trial level.Greater discretion undoubtedly leads to an increased potential for error, overstepping of bounds, incorrect decisions,and abuses of power. However, even with these potential problems, it is clear that today's society places greatreliance on the decisions of these courts. In an effort to control the amount of discretion given to the courtroomactors and ensure legitimacy of the judicial system at the trial level, both state and federal systems have constructedrules to regulate the roles of these actors while promoting justice, the goal of the American system of law."Even the most conscientious and educated decision-maker is destined to make mistakes. Not surprisingly, juriesmake more." [FN1] Because of these mistakes, judges in civil cases are often called upon to take corrective action.In extreme cases, judges may have a duty to overturn the verdicts of juries or order new trials following a jury'sverdict. This power of discretion in the hands of a trial judge is an immense responsibility. Accordingly, both thestate and federal systems require judges to follow certain protocols to validate the use of this power. However, it isapparent from statutory and case law that the rules which govern judicial discretion in Oregon differ significantlyfrom those of the *588 federal courts. [FN2]
