What is the test for a directed verdict in a motor vehicle accident?

[10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] A directed verdict is ... subjected to de novo appellate review. [T]he power of the court to direct a verdict is absolutely the same as the power of the court to grant a nonsuit. [Citation.] A motion for a directed verdict is in the nature of a demurrer to the evidence, and is governed by practically the same rules, and concedes as true the evidence on behalf of the adverse party, with all fair and reasonable inferences to be deduced therefrom. [Citation.] ( Brassinga v. City of Mountain View (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 195, 210, 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 660, fn. omitted.) A defendant is entitled to a nonsuit [or directed verdict] if the trial court determines that, as a matter of law, the evidence presented by plaintiff is insufficient to permit a jury to find in his favor. [Citation.] In determining whether plaintiff's evidence is sufficient, the court may not weigh the evidence or consider the credibility of witnesses. Instead, the evidence most favorable to plaintiff must be accepted as true and conflicting evidence must be disregarded.... [] In reviewing a grant of nonsuit [or directed verdict], we ... will not sustain the judgment unless interpreting the evidence most favorably to plaintiff's case and most strongly against the defendant and resolving all presumptions, inferences and doubts in favor of the plaintiff a judgment for the defendant is required as a matter of law. ' [Citation.] ( Colbaugh v. Hartline (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1516, 1521, 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 213.)