A South Dakota Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (NOV) or, in the Alternative, for a New Trial can be filed when prejudicial statements have been made during a trial. This motion identifies the presence of prejudicial comments or statements that had a negative impact on the fairness or outcome of the trial, potentially influencing the jury's decision. The purpose of filing a Motion for NOV or a New Trial is to request the court to either overturn the jury's verdict or grant a new trial. The following are different types of motions that can be filed under these circumstances: 1. Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict: This motion is typically filed after a jury trial when the jury has returned a verdict against the position of the party filing the motion. It argues that the evidence presented during the trial did not support the jury's decision and that the verdict is unjust. This motion focuses on the legal aspects of the case and challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict. 2. Motion for a New Trial: This motion seeks a new trial based on various grounds, including the presence of prejudicial statements during the trial. Prejudicial statements can include inappropriate comments made by witnesses, the opposing party, or even the judge. A Motion for a New Trial aims to demonstrate that these statements had a significant impact on the fairness of the trial and affected the jury's ability to deliberate impartially. When filing a Motion for NOV or a New Trial based on prejudicial statements at trial, it is crucial to provide specific details about the statements made, their context, and their potential impact on the trial's outcome. The motion should explain how these comments violated the defendant's rights, compromised the fairness of the proceedings, or misled the jury. It is essential to consult with an experienced attorney familiar with South Dakota trial law to appropriately draft and submit a Motion for NOV or a New Trial. Crafting a persuasive argument supported by relevant case law and thorough analysis of the prejudicial statements is critical in increasing the chances of a favorable outcome from the court.