Delzer Pipeline Construction, Inc's Motion for Summary Judgment/Summary Adjudication
Defendant, Delzer Pipeline Construction, Inc.'s (Delzer) motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication is denied.
A defendant moving for summary judgment must show either that one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established or there is a complete defense to the cause of action.
In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the Court must consider all of the evidence and all of the inferences reasonably drawn therefrom (Code Civ. Proc. §437c(c) and must view such evidence in the light most favorable to the opposing party. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826,843)
The Court notes at the outset, plaintiffs procedural objections to the motion for summary adjudication. The Court agrees that the motion for summary adjudication could be denied for the failure to comply with the procedural rules. However in this instance, the Court has determined to rule on the
Hearing Date
August 30, 2012
Category
Civil - Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Delzer Pipeline Construction, Inc's Motion for Summary Judgment/Summary Adjudication
Defendant, Delzer Pipeline Construction, Inc.'s (Delzer) motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication is denied.
A defendant moving for summary judgment must show either that one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established or there is a complete defense to the cause of action.
In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the Court must consider all of the evidence and all of the inferences reasonably drawn therefrom (Code Civ. Proc. §437c(c) and must view such evidence in the light most favorable to the opposing party. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826,843)
The Court notes at the outset, plaintiffs procedural objections to the motion for summary adjudication. The Court agrees that the motion for summary adjudication could be denied for the failure to comply with the procedural rules. However in this instance, the Court has determined to rule on the