Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
A motion for summary judgment is “[a] request that the court enter judgment without a trial because there is no genuine issue of material fact to be decided by a fact-finder — that is, because the evidence is legally insufficient to support a verdict in the nonmovant's favor.” (Motion for Summary Judgment, Black's Law Dictionary, 11th ed. 2019, available at Westlaw.)
“In federal court and in most state courts, the movant-defendant must point out in its motion the absence of evidence on an essential element of the plaintiff's claim, after which the burden shifts to the nonmovant-plaintiff to produce evidence raising a genuine fact issue. But if a party moves for summary judgment on its own claim or defense, then it must establish each element of the claim or defense as a matter of law.” (Id.)
“Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e) states that, ‘When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleadings, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.’” (Buie v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London (2002) 79 Ark. App. 344…)
“The essence of the summary judgment rule is that the judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, deposition, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” (See Rule 56(c), Ariz.R.Civ.P., 16 A.R.S.; Orme School v. Reeves (1990) 166 Ariz. 301…)
Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 437c, notice of the motion and supporting papers shall be served on all other parties at least 75 days before the hearing, the opposition papers are due…
The courts hold the movant to a strict standard. To satisfy his burden the movant must make a showing that it is quite clear what the truth is, and that excludes any real doubt as to the existence of any genuine issue of material fact. As the burden of proof is on the movant, the evidence must be…
“A party seeking to recover upon a claim, counterclaim or crossclaim may, at any time after the expiration of 20 days from the commencement of the action or after service of a motion for summary judgment and at any time prior to the marking of the case for trial, move, with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party's favor upon all or any part thereof.” (See Gorol v. Myro Corp., No. CPU6-16-000670, at *4 (Del. Com. Pleas Apr. 5, 2019).)
Under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c), a motion for summary judgment must (1) state with particularity the grounds on which it is based and the substantial matters of law to be argued, and (2) support factual positions by citing to specific parts of…
“Summary judgment cannot be avoided based on speculation or conjecture; once the pleadings are pierced with actual evidence, the plaintiff must point to admissible evidence showing a genuine issue of fact.” (Cowart, supra, 287 Ga. at 634 citing Butler v. Huckabee (1993) 209 Ga. App. 761…)
“Summary judgment is proper where the ‘pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’” (Millennium Park v. Houlihan (2010) 241 Ill. 2d 281…)
Rule 56 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, 365 Mass. 824 (1974), provides that a court shall grant a party's motion for summary judgment if (1) there is no genuine issue of material fact, and (2) the moving party is entitled to…
“A motion for summary judgment under GCR 1963, 117.2(1) tests the legal sufficiency of the pleadings with all well-pleaded facts accepted as true. Summary judgment is warranted only if a claim is so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could justify a right to recovery.” (Stewart v. Isbell (1986) 155 Mich. App. 65…)
“Summary judgment is a determination as a matter of law that there is no fact issue to be tried.” (See Fauvergue v. Garrett (1980) 597 S.W.2d 252…)
“Under N.D.R.Civ.P. Rule 56(c), the moving party is entitled to summary judgment if it appears that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” (See Luithle v. Taverna (1974) 214 N.W.2d 117…)
“Rule 4:46-1 permits a party to move for summary judgment at any time after the expiration of 35 days from the service of the pleading claiming such relief.” (See Alpert, Goldberg, Butler, Norton, Weiss v. Quinn (2009) 410 N.J. Super. 510…)
Summary judgment is foreclosed either when the record discloses the existence of a genuine controversy concerning a material issue of fact, or when the district court granted summary judgment based upon an error of law.” (City of Albuquerque v. SMP Props., LLC. (2018) 433 P.3d 336…)
Indeed, as the Nevada Supreme Court has made abundantly clear, “[w]hen a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as required by NRCP 56, the non-moving party may not rest upon general allegations and conclusions, but must, by affidavit or otherwise, set forth specific facts demonstrating the existence of a genuine factual issue.” (Wood v. Safeway (2005) 121 Nev. 724…)
Under New York Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212, the court may set a deadline to file a motion for summary judgment, but if the Court does not set such a date, the motion must be made no later than 120 days after the filing of the note at issue…
“The Ohio summary judgment statute was taken from Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The federal courts have ... established the rule that, on motion for summary judgment, the burden of establishing that the material facts are not in dispute and that no genuine issue of facts exists is on the party moving for the summary judgment.” (Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co. (1978) 54 Ohio St. 2d 64…)
“Summary judgment is proper only when there is no genuine issue of any material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (See Green v. Jacobson (1998) 963 P.2d 26…)
“To warrant summary judgment, the moving party must show that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (See Dowd v. Weyerhaeuser Co. (1981) 50 Or. App. 211…)
Specifically, Summary judgment is proper “if, after the completion of discovery relevant to the motion, including the production of expert reports, an adverse party who will bear the burden of proof at trial has failed to produce evidence of facts essential to the cause of action or defense which in a jury trial would require the issues to be submitted to a jury.” (Lineberger v. Wyeth (2006) 894 A.2d 141, 146 citing Pa. R.C.P. 1035.2.)
It is also well settled that pursuant to Super. R. Civ. P. 56, “a party seeking to . . . obtain a declaratory judgment may, at any time after the expiration of 20 days from the commencement of the action . . . move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party's favor upon all or any part thereof.” (See Alves v. Cintas Corp. No. 2, C.A. No. PC-2009-2412, at *15-16 (R.I. Super. July 8, 2013).)
Under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 166a, a motion for summary judgment must be filed and served at least 21 days prior to the hearing date…
“Summary judgment is appropriate only if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” (See Hedman v. Crum, No. 33318-3-III, at *1 (Wash. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2016).)
“Summary judgment is used to determine whether there are disputed issues for trial.” (See Seventh Michigan, v. Estate, Spector, No. 95-0879, at *1 (Wis. Ct. App. Oct. 1, 1996).)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.