Can a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict be sustained?

"It is settled that a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict should be granted only if a motion for directed verdict should have been granted [citation] and that the cardinal requirement for the granting of either motion is the absence of any substantial conflict in the evidence. [Citation.] Stated differently, a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict may be sustained only when it can be said as a matter of law that no other reasonable conclusion is legally deducible from the evidence and that any other holding would be so lacking in evidentiary support that the reviewing court would be compelled to reverse it or the trial court would be required to set it aside as a matter of law. [Citation.] The court is not authorized to determine the weight of the evidence or the credibility of witnesses. [Citation.]" (Spillman v. San Francisco (1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 782, 786.)