Motion for New Trial: Grounds, Deadlines, and How to Win One

A motion for new trial is a post-trial request asking the court that just heard the case to vacate the judgment and order a new trial. In federal civil practice it is governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. In federal criminal practice it is governed by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33. Every state has a parallel rule with similar grounds and similar deadlines. The motion is the most important post-trial filing in the litigation toolkit: it preserves issues for appeal, tolls the appeal clock under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4), and gives the trial judge, who lived through the trial and knows the record, the first chance to fix what went wrong.

Federal Civil Grounds Under Rule 59

Rule 59 itself does not enumerate grounds. Federal courts have read into it a list developed over a century: (1) the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence; (2) the damages are excessive or grossly inadequate; (3) substantial evidentiary or legal errors occurred at trial; (4) the trial was unfair due to attorney misconduct, juror misconduct, or improper closing argument; (5) newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered before trial with reasonable diligence; and (6) the verdict is the result of compromise. The standard of review is the trial judge's sound discretion, and an order granting or denying the motion is reversed on appeal only for abuse of that discretion.

Federal Criminal Grounds Under Rule 33

Rule 33 explicitly authorizes a new trial "if the interest of justice so requires." The two most common grounds are newly discovered evidence and substantial trial error. Rule 33(b)(1) gives the defendant three years to move based on newly discovered evidence; all other grounds must be raised within 14 days after the verdict. Granting a new trial in a criminal case is rare, and reversal of a denial on appeal is rarer still.

Deadlines

Court	Deadline	Tolls Appeal Clock?
Federal civil (Rule 59)	28 days after entry of judgment	Yes (FRAP 4(a)(4))
Federal criminal newly discovered (Rule 33(b)(1))	3 years from verdict	Only if filed within 14 days
Federal criminal other (Rule 33(b)(2))	14 days from verdict	Yes
California (CCP 659)	15 days after notice of entry of judgment, or earlier of 180 days from entry	Yes (CCP 659.1)
Texas (TRCP 329b)	30 days after judgment is signed	Yes
New York (CPLR 4404)	15 days after verdict	Yes

Drafting the Motion

The strongest motions for new trial are short, surgical, and grounded in transcript citations. Each ground is stated as a separately numbered argument, each argument is tied to a specific ruling preserved by contemporaneous objection at trial, and each argument cites either the controlling pattern jury instruction, the relevant rule, or binding circuit law. The motion attaches the relevant transcript pages as exhibits and, where feasible, the proposed corrected jury instruction or evidentiary ruling. A motion that argues "the verdict is wrong" without these specifics almost always fails.

Newly Discovered Evidence

Most jurisdictions require the movant to show five things: (1) the evidence was discovered after trial; (2) the movant exercised diligence in trying to discover it before trial; (3) the evidence is not merely cumulative or impeaching; (4) the evidence is material; and (5) the evidence would probably produce a different result on retrial. Email files found in storage, witnesses who came forward late, and forensic results obtained after trial are common fact patterns. The diligence requirement is unforgiving: evidence the movant could have found with a basic discovery request rarely qualifies.

Excessive or Inadequate Damages

If the trial judge believes the damages are excessive but liability was correctly found, the judge often offers a remittitur: a conditional new trial that takes effect unless the prevailing party accepts a reduced damages figure. The reverse, additur, is allowed in most state courts but unconstitutional in federal civil cases under Dimick v. Schiedt. Both devices avoid the cost of a full retrial.

Strategic Reasons to File

Even when the motion is unlikely to succeed, filing serves three independent strategic purposes. First, it tolls the appeal clock and gives the lawyer 28 days plus the time the court takes to decide the motion to evaluate the appellate record. Second, it forces the trial judge to articulate the reasoning behind contested rulings on the record, which often surfaces errors that strengthen the appeal. Third, it preserves issues that might otherwise be considered waived for failure to bring them to the trial court's attention.

Motion for New Trial vs. Motion to Vacate vs. Motion for JNOV

These are easily confused but operate differently. A motion to vacate under Rule 60 attacks the judgment itself, often on grounds discovered long after trial, with deadlines extending to one year (Rule 60(b)(1)-(3)) or "a reasonable time" (Rule 60(b)(4)-(6)). A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), now styled as a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(b), asks the court to enter judgment for the moving party because no reasonable jury could have returned the verdict. A motion for new trial does not flip the verdict; it asks for a do-over.

When the court grants a Rule 50(b) motion, Rule 50(c) requires it to also rule conditionally on any pending motion for new trial, stating whether a new trial should be granted if the judgment is later reversed on appeal. The conditional ruling does not end the case; it tells the appellate court what happens next. If the court of appeals reverses the judgment as a matter of law, the conditional grant of a new trial takes effect unless the appellate court orders otherwise. Careful movants file both motions together within the 28-day window so the trial court can make both rulings at once.

Related Civil Procedure Guides

• filing a notice of appeal
• appellate brief structure under FRAP 28
• JNOV under Rule 50(b)
• motion for reconsideration timing
• appellate standards of review

Frequently Asked Questions

What does motion for a new trial mean?

A motion for new trial is a post-trial filing asking the court that just heard the case to throw out the verdict and order a new trial. The motion is the most common post-trial filing in both civil and criminal cases. It preserves issues for appeal, tolls the appeal clock, and gives the trial judge a chance to fix substantial errors before an appellate court has to.

What is a motion for a new trial under Rule 33?

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 authorizes a new trial in a criminal case "if the interest of justice so requires." The two most common grounds are newly discovered evidence (which has a three-year deadline) and substantial trial error (14 days). Granting a Rule 33 motion is rare; the trial judge's discretion is broad, and appellate review is for abuse of discretion.

What is the deadline to file a motion for new trial?

In federal civil cases, 28 days from entry of judgment under Rule 59. In federal criminal cases, 14 days from verdict for most grounds and 3 years for newly discovered evidence under Rule 33. State deadlines vary widely: California is 15 days from notice of entry under CCP 659, Texas is 30 days under TRCP 329b, and New York is 15 days from verdict under CPLR 4404. Missing the deadline almost always forfeits the motion.

What are common grounds for a new trial?

The verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence, the damages are excessive or grossly inadequate, substantial legal or evidentiary errors occurred at trial, attorney or juror misconduct, improper closing argument, newly discovered evidence that diligence could not have uncovered earlier, and a verdict that appears to be the result of compromise. Each ground must be tied to specific transcript citations and preserved by contemporaneous objection.

Can jurors testify about misconduct during deliberations?

Almost never. Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) bars juror testimony about statements made during deliberations and about any juror's mental processes when a verdict is being challenged. Jurors may testify only about extraneous prejudicial information reaching the jury room, improper outside influence such as a bribe or threat, or a clerical mistake in entering the verdict on the form. The Supreme Court recognized one constitutional exception in Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado (2017): when a juror makes a clear statement of racial bias against a criminal defendant, the no-impeachment rule must give way. State versions of the rule vary in scope.

What is the difference between weight and sufficiency of the evidence?

Sufficiency asks whether any reasonable jury could have reached the verdict at all; it is the standard for a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, and winning it means judgment for the movant. Weight asks whether the verdict, though supported by legally sufficient evidence, is against the clear weight of what the jury heard; it is the Rule 59 standard, and the remedy is a new trial, not judgment. On a weight challenge the trial judge may weigh evidence and assess credibility, which is forbidden on a Rule 50 motion.

Can the deadline for a motion for new trial be extended?

Not in federal court. Rule 6(b)(2) expressly forbids the district court from extending the 28-day deadline in Rule 59, even for good cause, and a late motion does not toll the appeal clock. The only remaining route is Rule 60, which carries longer deadlines but far narrower grounds. State practice varies: some states permit short extensions on good cause, and some measure the deadline from notice of entry of judgment rather than from entry itself.

When to Hire a Trial or Appellate Lawyer

A motion for new trial is the trial lawyer's last chance to fix the record before the appellate court takes over. Our litigation team drafts motions for new trial and notices of appeal within the post-trial window, with full transcript citations and tolling-motion analysis.