Which of the following is a recognized ground for a new trial under Rule 59?

• A. Insufficiency of evidence to justify verdict
• B. Delay in filing post-trial motions
• C. Jury bias not proven
• D. Failure to attach a transcript

Answer: (A)

Under Rule 59, a new trial may be granted when the verdict is not justified by the evidence in the record. If the evidence presented at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, would not support a verdict in that party’s favor, the court may order a new trial. This directly matches the idea of insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict—the court can intervene to prevent a judgment that the record doesn’t reasonably support.

The other scenarios aren’t recognized grounds for a new trial on their own. Delays in filing post-trial motions concern timing and procedure rather than a substantive reason to redo the case. A lack of proven jury bias isn’t itself a standalone ground without showing how the bias affected the verdict. And failing to attach a transcript is a procedural or appellate requirement, not a basis for granting a new trial.