Please help interpret

[ndragon]

This is regarding a passage that allows a defendent in a case to file a motion to dismiss:
"After the plaintiff, in an action tried by the court without a jury, has completed the presentation of his evidence the defendant, without waiving his right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, may move for a dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief." Utah R. Civ. P. 41(b).

Here is the question. This passage says "in an action tried by the court without a jury." Does this mean you actually have to have your case heard in front of a judge, in a court room, before you can file a motion to dismiss.
Or, in this case, if the Plaintiff has already presented their evidence to the court through motions, and has requested a motion for summary judgment, can a motion to dismiss be filed if appropriate facts are presented to support the dismissal of actions?

Thanks,
Nick

 

[Green_Hornet]

Under Rule 41(b), the court may dismiss if "(1) the claimant has failed to introduce sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case, or (2) the trial court is not persuadedby that evidence." Walker , 844 P.2d at 340. As with a directed verdict,whether dismissal was appropriate for failure to make a prima facie case is a question of law reviewed for correctness. See Sorenson v. Kennecott-Utah Copper Corp. , 873 P.2d 1141, 1144 (Utah Ct. App. 1994).