Short answer. Yes — the motion is called a demurrer to evidence. After the plaintiff completes presentation of evidence, you may move for dismissal on the ground that the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. The risk: if the demurrer is granted but reversed on appeal, you are deemed to have waived your right to present evidence.
What the law says
the defendant may move for dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief
Rule 33, Section 1 — Demurrer to evidence. Read the full provision →
What the law says
If the motion is granted but on appeal the order of dismissal is reversed, he or she shall be deemed to have waived the right to present evidence.
Rule 33, Section 1 — Demurrer to evidence. Read the full provision →
What a demurrer to evidence is
Once the plaintiff rests, the defendant may move for dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. The demurrer says, in effect: even taking everything the plaintiff has presented, it is not enough — the case fails on the plaintiff's own showing. It is a test of the plaintiff's evidence alone, made at the halfway point of trial, and if it succeeds the case ends there without the defendant lifting a finger on evidence of their own.
If the demurrer is denied, you lose nothing
The rule is explicit about the safe half of the gamble: if his or her motion is denied, he or she shall have the right to present evidence. A denial simply means the trial continues — the court thinks the plaintiff's evidence, unrebutted, could support relief, so it is now your turn to rebut it. Your defence proceeds exactly as it would have without the demurrer. In a civil case, then, the motion itself is a relatively low-cost move at this stage: the true exposure lies elsewhere.
The real risk sits in the appeal
Here is the trap: if the motion is granted but on appeal the order of dismissal is reversed, he or she shall be deemed to have waived the right to present evidence. Win the demurrer, and the plaintiff will likely appeal. If the appellate court disagrees with the dismissal, you do not get a second trial to put on the defence you skipped — the case is resolved on the plaintiff's evidence alone, with your side of the story never heard. A granted demurrer is therefore only as safe as it is correct.
How to weigh the gamble
The calculation is honesty about strength. A demurrer makes sense when the plaintiff's case has a genuine, visible hole — a missing element, no proof connecting you to the obligation, a claim resting on documents that were never properly presented. It is dangerous when the plaintiff's case is merely weak rather than fatally deficient, because a borderline dismissal is exactly the kind an appellate court may reverse — and by then your evidence is gone. Before filing one, ask counsel the hard question: if a higher court sees this differently, can we live with the record as it stands?