Summary Judgment
Summary judgment is the motion that says there is nothing for a jury to decide, so the court should decide the case now.
19. Summary Judgment
Any party can move for summary judgment on any claim or defense. The court shall grant summary judgment if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56.
- Any party may move for summary judgment on any claim or defense.
- Parties may support a motion for summary judgment with affidavits, products of discovery, and other factual materials. Unlike the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a motion for summary judgment is not limited to the allegations of the complaint or answer.
- When resolving a summary judgment motion, the court will consider only evidence that would be admissible at trial.
- A court will construe all factual allegations in the light most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment.
- A court will grant summary judgment if, after construing all factual allegations in the light most favorable to the opposing party, “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Rule 56.
- There are two ways to meet this standard.
- A party may point to affidavits, products of discovery, and other factual materials showing that the standard has been met.
- Alternatively, a party may point to the record and demonstrate that the opposing party lacks admissible evidence to support an element of their claim or defense.
Summary judgment lets any party win on any claim or defense before trial when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Unlike a motion to dismiss, it reaches outside the pleadings into the actual evidence.
The standard has two parts that travel together: the court grants the motion if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. What sets summary judgment apart from a motion to dismiss is what the court can look at. Unlike a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, summary judgment is not limited to the allegations of the complaint or answer. Parties may support the motion with affidavits, products of discovery, and other factual materials.
Two guardrails control how the court uses that evidence. First, the court will consider only evidence that would be admissible at trial. Inadmissible material does not count. Second, the court construes all factual allegations in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. The movant does not get the benefit of the doubt; the non-movant does.
- 1Point to affidavits, products of discovery, and other factual materials that affirmatively show there is no genuine dispute and the law favors the movant.
- 2Point to the record and show that the opposing party lacks admissible evidence to support an element of their claim or defense. This route is powerful: you do not have to disprove the other side's case; you can win by showing the other side has no admissible evidence on an essential element.
The classic trap is blurring summary judgment with the motion to dismiss. If the court is weighing affidavits and discovery, you are in summary judgment, not a motion to dismiss. And note the favorable-inference rule cuts against the moving party, so any answer that gives the movant the favorable light has it backwards.
"No real fight, so I win as a matter of law."
Any party, any claim or defense.
The standard: no genuine dispute of material fact and entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Unlike a motion to dismiss, summary judgment looks outside the pleadings at affidavits and discovery, but only at evidence admissible at trial.
Inferences go to the party opposing the motion, not the movant.
Two ways to win: affirmatively show no dispute, or show the opponent lacks admissible evidence on an element.
The tell that you are not in a motion to dismiss: outside evidence is in play.
A defendant moves for summary judgment in a negligence suit after discovery closes. The defendant points to the deposition record and shows that the plaintiff has no admissible evidence on causation, an essential element of the claim. The plaintiff responds with a single affidavit, but it rests entirely on hearsay that would not be admissible at trial. The plaintiff argues that the court should read the affidavit in the defendant's favor and deny the motion only if the defendant has disproved causation.
The court may grant summary judgment. The defendant met the standard by the second route, pointing to the record to show the plaintiff lacks admissible evidence on an essential element; the defendant did not have to affirmatively disprove causation. Flip one fact: if the plaintiff had produced an admissible expert opinion on causation, that would create a genuine dispute of material fact and defeat the motion.
An option confines the court to the allegations of the complaint or answer.
Unlike a motion to dismiss, summary judgment is not limited to the pleadings; it is supported by affidavits, products of discovery, and other factual materials.An option construes the facts in favor of the movant, drops one half of the two-part standard, or has the court weigh credibility or persuasiveness.
Inferences favor the party opposing the motion, both parts of the standard must be met, and the court does not weigh credibility; a genuine dispute of material fact defeats the motion.An option says the movant must affirmatively disprove the opponent's claim and cannot win by showing a gap.
A party may instead point to the record and show the opponent lacks admissible evidence to support an element of the claim or defense.An option lets inadmissible material (such as hearsay) create or defeat a genuine dispute.
The court considers only evidence that would be admissible at trial; inadmissible material is set aside.the stem hands you a party asking the court to decide a claim or defense without a trial, pointing to affidavits, deposition testimony, or other discovery rather than just the pleadings.
The instant outside evidence is in play before trial, you are in summary judgment, not a motion to dismiss.
Run the standard: is there no genuine dispute of material fact and is the movant entitled to judgment as a matter of law, with the facts viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, counting only evidence admissible at trial?
Then check the route: did the movant affirmatively show no dispute, or did the movant instead point to the record to show the opponent lacks admissible evidence on an element?
Either route can carry the motion.
After discovery closed in a contract suit, a defendant asked the court to decide the case in its favor without a trial. To support the request, the defendant submitted sworn affidavits and excerpts of deposition testimony obtained in discovery. The plaintiff objected that the court could look only at what the complaint and answer alleged and could not consider the affidavits and deposition excerpts.
May the court consider the affidavits and deposition excerpts on this motion?
A plaintiff moved for summary judgment and supported the motion with detailed deposition testimony. The defendant opposed, offering a single sworn statement that conflicted with the plaintiff's account on a fact that would determine the outcome. The trial judge, when deciding the motion, read the conflicting facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff because the plaintiff was the moving party.
Did the judge apply the correct approach to the conflicting facts?
After discovery, a defendant moved for summary judgment without offering any evidence of its own to disprove the plaintiff's claim. Instead, the defendant pointed to the developed record and demonstrated that the plaintiff had no admissible evidence to support an essential element of the claim. The plaintiff argued that the motion had to fail because the defendant had not affirmatively produced evidence disproving that element.
Can the defendant meet the summary judgment standard in this way?
On a defendant's motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff opposed with a single affidavit, but the affidavit rested entirely on statements that would be inadmissible hearsay at trial. The defendant's properly supported materials showed no genuine dispute on any material fact once the inadmissible affidavit was set aside. The plaintiff insisted that the affidavit, admissible or not, created a dispute that required a trial.
How should the court treat the plaintiff's inadmissible affidavit in deciding the motion?
In a negligence suit, a plaintiff who is defending against the defendant's summary judgment motion produced an admissible expert opinion squarely contradicting the defendant's evidence on causation, a fact that would decide the case. The defendant's materials and the plaintiff's expert opinion directly conflict on that decisive point. The defendant nonetheless asked the court to grant judgment in its favor.
Should the court grant the defendant's motion for summary judgment?