A Motion for Summary Adjudication can be filed when a moving party cannot show that all evidence is in favor of the party.

How to Structure the Motion

“A party may move for summary adjudication as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if the party contends that the cause of action has no merit, that there is no affirmative defense to the cause of action, that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, that there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in Section 3294 of the Civil Code, or that one or more defendants either owed or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or plaintiffs. A motion for summary adjudication shall be granted only if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense, a claim for damages, or an issue of duty.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c(f)(1); Lilienthal & Fowler v. Sup. Ct. (1993) 12 Cal. App. 4th 1848, 1853-1854; Hood v. Super. Ct. (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 319, 321.)

The Civil Code allows “the parties to stipulate to bring a summary adjudication motion as to other issues or claims for damages if they first obtain leave of court before they bring their motion.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(t); Jimenez v. Protective Life Ins. Co. (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 528, 534.) There is a sound reason for this rule: “...the opposing party may have decided to raise only one triable issue of fact in order to defeat the motion, without intending to concede the other issues. It would be unfair to grant a summary adjudication order unless the opposing party was on notice that an issue-by-issue adjudication might be ordered if summary judgment was denied.” (Gonzales v. Super. Ct. (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 1542, 1546.)

A motion for summary adjudication must be accompanied by a written notice of motion. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1350(c)(1); see Code Civ. Proc., § 1010; Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1110.) Failure to do so risks due process violations, especially given the substantial impact on the rights of the opposing party or parties.

Note, summary adjudication cannot be ordered on the court’s own motion. (Scheiding v. Dinwiddie Const. Co. (1999) 69 Cal. App. 4th 64, 75.) Similarly, a motion for summary adjudication requires a separate statement of fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c(b)(1).)

“If made in the alternative, a motion for summary adjudication may make reference to and depend on the same evidence submitted in support of the summary judgment motion. If summary adjudication is sought, whether separately or as an alternative to the motion for summary judgment, the specific cause of action, affirmative defense, claims for damages, or issues of duty must be stated specifically in the notice of motion and be repeated, verbatim, in the separate statement of undisputed material facts.” (Rules of Court, rule 3.1350(b); see also Code Civ. Proc., § 437c(f)(2).)

And as with summary judgment:

1. A plaintiff or cross-complainant has met his or her burden of showing that there is no defense to a cause of action if that party has proved each element of the cause of action entitling the party to judgment on the cause of action. Once the plaintiff or cross-complainant has met that burden, the burden shifts to the defendant or cross-defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. The defendant or cross-defendant shall not rely upon the allegations or denials of its pleadings to show that a triable issue of material fact exists but, instead, shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.
2. A defendant or cross-defendant has met his or her burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if the party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action, even if not separately pleaded, cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to the cause of action. Once the defendant or cross-defendant has met that burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff or cross-complainant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. The plaintiff or cross-complainant shall not rely upon the allegations or denials of its pleadings to show that a triable issue of material fact exists but, instead, shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 437c(p).)

“The Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in support of a motion must separately identify:

1. Each cause of action, claim for damages, issue of duty, or affirmative defense that is the subject of the motion; and
2. Each supporting material fact claimed to be without dispute with respect to the cause of action, claim for damages, issue of duty, or affirmative defense that is the subject of the motion.”

(Rules of Court, rule 3.1350(d)(1).)

“The separate statement should include only material facts and not any facts that are not pertinent to the disposition of the motion.” (Rules of Court, rule 3.1350(d)(2).)

Response

If a triable issue is raised as to any of the facts in a separate statement, the motion must be denied. (Nazir v. United Airlines, Inc. (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 243, 252; see also, § 437c(p)(2) (a plaintiff need only show “that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto”).)