145:
moving party, summary judgment is appropriate. Sometimes this will occur when there is no real dispute as to what happened, but it also frequently occurs when there is a nominal dispute but the non-moving party cannot produce enough evidence to support its position. A party may also move for summary judgment in order to eliminate the risk of losing at trial, and possibly avoid having to go through discovery (i.e., by moving at the outset of discovery), by demonstrating to the judge, via
1232:
availability of summary adjudication; most superior courts tend to side with the narrowest interpretation of
California Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, under which a party may make such a motion only with respect to an entire cause of action, an affirmative defense, or a punitive-damages claim. There is also language in section 437c about "issues of duty", but some Court of Appeal panels have given that phrase an extremely narrow interpretation due to evidence that the
1428:. In this case, the Supreme Court of Canada announced a cultural shift, in favor of greater reliance on summary judgment motions to adjudicate disputes, as opposed to reliance on conventional trial. This shift was urged by a desire to increase access to civil justice, by interpreting summary judgment rules broadly, "favoring proportionality and fair access to the affordable, timely and just adjudication of claims".
1240:
noted to be heard on the date the defendant is required to appear under CPLR 320(a). If the plaintiff sets down the hearing date later than the minimum, he may require the defendant to serve a copy of the answering paper on him within the extended period. If the motion is denied the moving and answering papers shall be deemed the complaint and answer, respectively, unless the court orders otherwise.
976:
711:
129:, but in many jurisdictions the judge now acts as the factfinder as well. It is the factfinder who decides "what really happened", and it is the judge who applies the law to the facts as determined by the factfinder, whether directly or by giving instructions to the jury. In the absence of an award of summary judgment (or some type of pretrial dismissal), a lawsuit ordinarily proceeds to
36:
1050:: Tenets 1–3 must be interpreted/construed in the light most favorable/advantageous to nonmovant (never to movant), and belief/credit awarded thereto (as to whether a dispute exists, not as to who wins the dispute, though either interpretation unambiguously satisfies the only question at summary judgment, which is whether or not a dispute exists).
881:. Other pretrial motions, such as a "motion for judgment on the pleadings" or a "motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted", can be converted by the judge to summary-judgment motions if matters outside the pleadings are presented to – and not excluded by – the trial-court judge.
1239:
In New York, there is the procedure of summary judgment in lieu of complaint CPLR § 3213. This allows a plaintiff in an action based on an instrument to pay money only or a judgment to file a motion for summary judgment and supporting papers with the summons instead of a complaint. The motion must be
1218:
requires the moving party to actually present evidence rather than merely refer to evidence. This is done by attaching relevant documents and by summarizing all relevant factual points within those documents in a separate statement of facts. In turn, the record to be reviewed by the judge can be very
133:, which is an opportunity for litigants to contest evidence in an attempt to persuade the factfinder that they are saying "what really happened", and that, under the applicable law, they should prevail. The necessary steps before a case can get to trial include disclosing documents to the opponent by
1176:
To defeat a summary-judgment motion, the non-moving party only has to show substantial evidence that a dispute of material facts exists, regardless of the strength of that evidence. For example, even if the moving side can produce the testimony of "a dozen bishops", and the non-moving side only has
144:
A party moving (applying) for summary judgment is attempting to avoid the time and expense of a trial when, in the moving party's view, the outcome is obvious. Typically this is stated as, when all the evidence likely to be put forward is such that no reasonable factfinder could disagree with the
157:
The moving party will also attempt to persuade the court that the undisputed material facts require judgment to be entered in its favor. In many jurisdictions, a party moving for summary judgment takes the risk that, although the judge may agree there are no material issues of fact remaining for
1258:
have developed their own requirements included in local rules for filing summary-judgment motions. Local rules can set limits on the number of pages, explain if a separate factual statement is required, whether it is acceptable to combine motion petition with a response, and if a judge needs an
1231:
Section 577 as the "final determination of the rights of the parties" and a "partial summary judgment" is not actually final since it necessarily leaves some issues to be decided at trial. There is currently a conflict between the different districts of the
California Courts of Appeal as to the
1145:
often allow one to select specific state courts to search. Summary judgment is awarded if the undisputed facts and the law make it clear that it would be impossible for one party to prevail if the matter were to proceed to trial. The court must consider all designated evidence in the light most
1325:
However, certain types of filings containing information that would otherwise be redacted are excepted from redaction. Additionally, the local rules may require parties seeking to seal documents to first file a motion to seal and obtain leave of the court prior to filing the sealed documents.
1153:) deciding in favor of the party opposing the motion, then summary judgment is inappropriate. A decision granting summary judgment can be appealed without delay. A decision denying summary judgment ordinarily cannot be immediately appealed; instead, the case continues on its normal course. In
963:
Summary judgment in the United States applies only in civil cases. It does not apply to criminal cases to obtain a pretrial judgment of conviction or acquittal, in part because a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to a jury trial. Some federal and state-court judges publish general
109:
generally must find there is "no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." In
England and Wales, the court rules for a party without a full trial when "the claim, defence or issue has no real prospect of success and there is no other
1012:
essential element of its claim necessarily renders all other elements immaterial and results in summary judgment for the defendant. So these motions tend to be precisely targeted to the weakest points of the plaintiff's case. It is also possible for a plaintiff to seek summary judgment on a
1098:, and certified government documents). The pieces of evidence should be accompanied by a declaration from the moving party that all copies of the documents are true and correct, including deposition excerpts. Each party may present to the court its view of applicable law by submitting a
1439:, the Ontario Court of Appeal reports "the increase in summary judgment motions that have flowed since Hryniak" and that judges "are required to spend time hearing partial summary judgment motions and writing comprehensive reasons on an issue that does not dispose of the action."
995:
essential element of the claim or defense (as it would have to do at trial). To be successful, this type of summary-judgment motion must be drafted as a written preview of a party's entire case-in-chief (that it would put before the finder of fact at trial) because
105:. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case. The formulation of the summary judgment standard is stated in somewhat different ways by courts in different jurisdictions. In the United States, the presiding
959:
Of cardinal importance here is that, by design, the judge had no discretion at summary judgment time: all fact-finding is done by the jury at trial, not by the judge at summary judgment (the judge only looks for the existence of disputed facts to be found).
1129:
order. If a party wants to file a motion or a cross-motion for summary judgment after the deadline, it needs to ask for leave of court. Normally, federal judges require valid reasons to alter case-management deadlines and only do so with reluctance.
990:
First, a plaintiff may seek summary judgment on any cause of action, and similarly, a defendant may seek summary judgment in its favor on any affirmative defense. But in either case, the moving party must produce evidence in support of
971:
research, summary-judgment motions are filed in 17% of federal cases. 71% of summary-judgment motions were filed by defendants, 26% by plaintiffs. Out of these, 36% of the motions were denied, and 64% were granted in whole or in part.
1020:
Regardless of the type of summary judgment motion, there is a standardized rule(-like) framework for evaluating the first clause of Rule 56(a) ("no disputed genuine issue of material fact"), formulated as the following six core
2126:
1198:, meaning, without deference to the views of the trial judge, both as to the determination that there is no remaining genuine issue of material fact and that the prevailing party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
2156:
1333:, or the court can choose to order later that an additional filing be made under seal without redaction. Copies of both redacted and unredacted documents filed with the court should be provided to the other
1003:
Second, a different and very common tactic is where a defendant seeks summary judgment on a plaintiff's cause of action. The key difference is that in this latter situation, the defendant need only attack
2269:
2186:
1455:
There is no specific provision in German law for summary judgment, though a judge may dismiss a clearly unfounded case on the merits after a hearing and without receiving evidence into the record.
1310:
from the summary-judgment motion and accompanying exhibits. The redacted text can be erased with black-out or white-out, and the page should have an indication that it was redacted – most often by
1223:
case involved a record of about 18,400 pages. Also, California uses the term "summary adjudication" instead of "partial summary judgment". The
California view is that the latter term is an
1365:
There may be no summary judgment in possession proceedings against a mortgagor or a person holding over after the end of his tenancy whose occupancy is protected within the meaning of the
692:
1066:
proof/persuasion (that a rational/reasonable jury could find for nonmovant). All fact/credibility-finding must be reserved for the jury at trial, none for the judge at summary judgment.
2254:
2074:
1919:
873:
legal practice, summary judgment can be awarded by the court before trial, effectively holding that no trial will be necessary. At the federal level, a summary-judgment motion in
1398:(which has its own procedural device for disposing of abusive claims summarily), all provinces feature a summary judgment mechanism in their respective rules of civil procedure.
856:
851:
839:
822:
1044:: All issues must be considered in holistic relationship with one another, within the whole-record environment (not context-free line-by-line isolation); patterns may emerge.
1648:
1516:
2088:
534:
1177:
the testimony of a known liar, then summary judgment is not appropriate. Deciding on the relative credibility of witnesses is a question for the factfinder at trial.
2229:
685:
1056:: All reasonable/justifiable logical/legal inferences/implications from tenets 1–3 must also be interpreted favorably to nonmovant, and credit awarded thereto.
153:, that there are no material factual issues remaining to be tried. If there is nothing for the factfinder to decide, then the moving party asks rhetorically,
1854:
1361:
governs the award of summary judgment. Summary judgment is available in all claims against both the defendant and claimant with the following exceptions.
1192:
It is not uncommon for summary judgments of the lower U.S. courts in complex cases to be overturned on appeal. A grant of summary judgment is reviewed
1032:: All ("each/every", not just "some") factual issues must be considered/discussed—especially, all disputed/contested genuine issues of material facts.
1902:
678:
1463:
Summary judgment exists in Hong Kong. The test is whether there is a triable issue and if there is one, whether it amounts to an arguable defense.
2004:
955:
issue/fact is one that has the potential of affecting the outcome of the case/issue in dispute (judgment in favor of one party over the other).
53:
45:
2057:
1307:
849:, 257 (1986) (applying heightened evidentiary standard of proof in libel action to judicial assessment of propriety of summary judgment);
182:
1616:
815:, derived primarily from the three seminal cases concerning summary judgment out of the 1980s. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56;
573:
1875:
1841:
1680:
1228:
1166:
1158:
622:
1923:
794:
728:
342:
2021:
627:
1655:
1314:
the word "redacted" on the bottom. Alternately, the filing party may ask the court's permission to file some exhibits completely
1287:
1038:: The entire record ("whole set/totality of circumstances", not just a "subset"), must be considered, regarding each/every issue.
878:
866:, 596–98 (1986) (holding antitrust plaintiff with an inherently implausible claim was subject to dismissal at summary judgment).
812:
578:
193:
1565:
Leonetti, Carrie (Spring 2011). "When the
Emperor Has No Clothes: A Proposal for Defensive Summary Judgment in Criminal Cases".
1491:
1280:
834:
775:
1295:
1137:
to assist parties in finding court decisions that can be cited as an example or analogy to resolve similar questions of law.
747:
732:
2288:
Los
Angeles County Bar Association article comparing Federal Law and California summary judgment burden shifting differences
2290:
1157:, a denial of summary judgment cannot be appealed until final resolution of the whole case, because of the requirements of
832:, 322–27 (1986) (clarifying the shifting allocations of burdens of production, persuasion, and proof at summary judgment);
1584:
224:
1402:, after a study on the issues of access to justice, reformed its rules in 2010 to extend the powers of motion judges and
1233:
1154:
1122:
874:
754:
583:
198:
1435:, a number of court decisions have sought to limit its use in the context of motions for partial summary judgments. In
2044:
1986:
1207:
568:
219:
163:
1062:: For tenets 4–5, nonmovant bears the undemanding requirement of production only of favorable facts (and law)—i.e.,
333:
1858:
1283:
the motion completely, or order the party to re-file its motion, or grant a special exception to the local rules.
1141:
is the biggest database of full-text state and federal court decisions that can be accessed without charge. These
930:
is a (potential) event that the factfinder at trial (jury, or judge in the case of a bench trial) is charged with
761:
125:. A factfinder has to decide what the facts are and apply the law. In traditional common law the factfinder was a
1757:
272:
235:
1259:
additional copy of the documents (called a judge's copy), etc. Local rules can define page-layout elements like
1102:
supporting, or opposing, the motion. The opposing party may also file its own summary-judgment motion (called a
1126:
817:
941:
issue/fact means movant claims one thing, while nonmovant makes a different (conflicting/contradictory) claim.
743:
2309:
1419:
968:
721:
496:
117:
systems, questions about what the law actually is in a particular case are decided by judges; in rare cases
1965:
1236:
has been trying to stop the state courts from engaging in the piecemeal adjudication of individual issues.
2012:
1291:
934:(determining what "really happened", according to the credibility of the witnesses/experts/etc. at trial).
457:
452:
229:
1358:
948:
issue/fact is one that can be resolved in favor by either party, by some rational/reasonable factfinder.
860:
843:
826:
552:
489:
252:
122:
2025:
1540:
1070:
A party seeking summary judgment may refer to any evidence that would be admissible at trial, such as
2270:"The Legal System and Civil Procedure for Commercial Dispute Resolution in Hong Kong (Part II of II)"
1255:
1180:
Where appropriate, a court may award judgment summarily upon fewer than all claims. This is known as
633:
301:
240:
150:
1381:
1260:
1014:
983:
From a tactical perspective, there are two basic types of summary-judgment motions. One requires a
484:
389:
363:
265:
1394:
Summary judgment procedures were broadened in
Canadian courts in the 1980s. With the exception of
1807:
1684:
1472:
1424:
1403:
1345:
In the United States, the criminal law counterpart to summary judgment is the motion to dismiss.
1286:
Summary-judgment motions, like many other court filings, are a matter of public record. So under
1118:
904:). Per Rule 56(a), issuance of summary judgment can be based only upon the court's finding that,
434:
404:
369:
121:
of the law may act to contravene or complement the instructions or orders of the judge, or other
118:
918:
in applying the law to the (undisputed) facts, one party is clearly entitled by law to judgment.
2053:
1623:
1354:
1279:, etc. If the filed motion does not comply with the local rules, then the judge can choose to
1272:
1214:
is similar to federal practice, though with minor differences. For example, the U.S. state of
1142:
1134:
1099:
768:
618:
138:
1411:
1370:
1330:
1315:
1095:
1071:
474:
444:
17:
1882:
1711:
2294:
1728:
1083:
439:
429:
328:
295:
134:
1025:(SJTOR) (where the emphasized must indicate the lack of judicial discretion permitted):
1271:, and provide directions on how the pages need to be bound together – i.e., acceptable
1249:
1138:
863:
846:
829:
808:
563:
409:
94:
1793:
1008:
essential element of the plaintiff's claim. A finding that the plaintiff cannot prove
2303:
1942:
1779:
1377:
1366:
1194:
1107:
870:
588:
987:
evidentiary presentation, and the other requires only a more limited, targeted one.
1311:
603:
399:
374:
359:
338:
207:
1170:
1162:
1114:, generally where the judge wishes to question the lawyers on issues in the case.
975:
807:
In the United States federal courts, summary judgment is governed by
Federal Rule
2075:"British Columbia and Alberta New Rules of Civil Procedure – Initial Impressions"
1829:
1729:"Civil rights cases concluded in U.S. district courts, by disposition, 1990–2006"
1406:
for ordering summary judgment, following the introduction of similar measures in
2287:
1794:"An Examination of Citation Counts in a New Scholarly Communication Environment"
1334:
1319:
1303:
1211:
1150:
979:
Civil rights cases concluded in U.S. district courts, by disposition, 1990–2006.
885:
710:
516:
286:
258:
130:
102:
1591:
1276:
1268:
1215:
912:
664:
608:
379:
114:
1075:
545:
526:
521:
394:
323:
146:
110:
compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at a trial."
1987:"The Criminal Analogue to 12(b)(6): Judicial Power to Dismiss Indictments"
1299:
1224:
1087:
657:
354:
311:
101:
for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full
2052:. Toronto: Ministry of the Attorney General (Ontario). pp. 39–43.
2046:
Civil
Justice Reform Project: Summary of Findings & Recommendations
1422:
encouraged greater use of the procedure by the courts in its ruling in
1407:
1399:
1079:
735: in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
613:
419:
384:
1810:, 424 F.3d 806, delivered 26 September 2005, accessed 30 December 2023
1649:"Your First Motion for Summary Judgment from the Court's Perspective"
1395:
1111:
1091:
646:
888:
seeking summary judgment (or making any other motion) is called the
2089:"Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7 (CanLII), [2014] 1 SCR 87"
974:
506:
106:
98:
1264:
540:
126:
1985:
Francisco, N. J., Burnham, J., & Day, J. (July 20, 2016).
1329:
A person making a redacted filing can file an unredacted copy
704:
78:
29:
1146:
favorable to the party opposing the summary judgment motion.
141:. This process is lengthy, and can be difficult and costly.
137:, showing the other side the evidence, often in the form of
1322:'s name of the petitions should be replaced with initials.
1966:
Local Rules, U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota
1903:"Local Rules of U.S. District Court, District of Oklahoma"
1517:"The Key to Winning at Summary Judgment: Know Your Burden"
1876:"Local Rules of U.S. District Court, District of Indiana"
1106:), if the deadline still allows. The court may allow for
1920:"Local Rules of U.S. District Court, District of Oregon"
1376:
There may be no summary judgment against a defendant in
2268:
Mallesons, K., & Mallesons, W. (2 April 15, 2019).
1447:
Summary judgments are not permitted under
Turkish law.
57:
2259:. Practical Law US Signon. (Retrieved April 19, 2021).
1955:
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 5.2(b) et seq.
915:
between the parties requiring a trial to resolve; and
852:
Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp.
1758:"Scott v. Harris and the Future of Summary Judgment"
1541:"PART 24 - SUMMARY JUDGMENT - Civil Procedure Rules"
911:
there exists no disputed, genuine issue of material
1149:If a trial could result in the jury (or judge in a
1976:Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(B)(v)
1000:parts of an entire claim or defense are at issue.
1267:, distance between lines, mandatory footer text,
1250:Motion (legal) § Motion for summary judgment
2230:"Litigation and enforcement in Turkey: overview"
1842:California Code of Civil Procedure Section 577
964:guidelines and sample summary judgment forms.
158:trial, the judge may also find that it is the
686:
8:
1681:"How to Write a Motion for Summary Judgment"
1074:(or deposition excerpts), party admissions,
1017:, but those types of motions are very rare.
1897:
1895:
1774:
1772:
1770:
1870:
1868:
1820:
1818:
1816:
1585:"An Overview of Summary Judgment Practice"
693:
679:
178:
795:Learn how and when to remove this message
1937:
1935:
1933:
2005:"Summary Judgment Has its Day in Court"
1483:
645:
505:
465:
418:
310:
285:
206:
181:
2129:Baywood Homes Partnership v. Haditaghi
1706:
1704:
1702:
2043:Osborne, Coulter A. (November 2007).
1712:"Report on Summary Judgment Practice"
7:
1617:"Sample Motion for Summary Judgment"
1535:
1533:
733:adding citations to reliable sources
58:move details into the article's body
27:Court judgment without a full trial
2253:Thomson Reuters. (2020, April 1).
1943:"Federal Rules of Civil Procedure"
1808:Johnson v Ready Mixed Concrete Co.
1806:US Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit,
1229:California Code of Civil Procedure
25:
2073:Craig Ferris (13 February 2011).
1826:Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
1219:large; for example, the landmark
1133:There are also freely accessible
1023:summary judgment tenets of review
2228:Baysal, Pelin (3 January 2019).
1492:"Rule 2.116 Summary Disposition"
1288:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
879:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
813:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
709:
194:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
34:
1431:However, since the decision in
1227:since a judgment is defined by
1125:is set by judge in the initial
835:Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
720:needs additional citations for
1764:, Vol. 15:1351, pp. 1351–1386.
1567:Southern California Law Review
1296:Taxpayer Identification Number
877:is governed by Rule 56 of the
579:Notwithstanding verdict (JNOV)
1:
1206:Summary judgment practice in
896:); the opposing party is the
1234:California State Legislature
1188:Reviews of summary judgments
1155:United States federal courts
1082:, documents received during
875:United States District Court
199:Doctrines of civil procedure
18:Motion for summary judgement
2218:, 2017 ONCA 783 at para. 32
2216:Butera v. Chown, Cairns LLP
2159:Butera v. Chown, Cairns LLP
1437:Butera v. Chown, Cairns LLP
1173:(the final judgment rule).
1117:Deadline for filing of the
164:judgment as a matter of law
87:judgment as a matter of law
2326:
1247:
334:Case Information Statement
162:party that is entitled to
2197:. Ontario Court of Appeal
2167:. Ontario Court of Appeal
2137:. Ontario Court of Appeal
2095:. Supreme Court of Canada
2024:: 693–724. Archived from
1290:5.2, sensitive text like
1275:, number and location of
1123:U.S. federal court system
928:issue of (purported) fact
569:As a matter of law (JMOL)
1341:Criminal law counterpart
1182:partial summary judgment
818:Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
466:Resolution without trial
1420:Supreme Court of Canada
1048:Nonmovant trumps movant
969:Federal Judicial Center
1747:, 550 U.S. 372 (2007).
1496:michigancourtrules.org
1292:Social Security number
980:
458:Request for production
453:Request for admissions
170:Specific jurisdictions
85:, also referred to as
2077:. Lawson Lundell LLP.
2003:Janet Walker (2012).
1888:on 28 September 2011.
1756:Wolff, T. B. (n.d.).
1378:admiralty proceedings
1359:Civil Procedure Rules
978:
491:Involuntary dismissal
123:officers of the court
2272:. "China Law Insight
2189:Vandenberg v. Wilken
1306:'s names, should be
1302:, bank accounts and
1256:U.S. district courts
1202:State-court practice
729:improve this article
634:Declaratory judgment
302:Forum non conveniens
185:in the United States
151:documentary evidence
2031:on 1 February 2014.
2013:Queen's Law Journal
1855:"Local Court Rules"
1335:parties in the case
1119:dispositive motions
1015:affirmative defense
584:Motion to set aside
485:Voluntary dismissal
390:Indispensable party
364:affirmative defense
91:summary disposition
2293:2010-07-05 at the
2114:Hryniak v. Mauldin
2022:Queen's University
1762:Nevada Law Journal
1629:on 21 January 2012
1545:www.justice.gov.uk
1473:Dispositive motion
1425:Hryniak v. Mauldin
1244:Filing and privacy
1143:web search engines
1135:web search engines
981:
892:(usually, this is
744:"Summary judgment"
435:Initial conference
420:Pretrial procedure
139:witness statements
119:jury nullification
2059:978-1-4249-5130-7
1357:, Part 24 of the
1355:England and Wales
1349:England and Wales
805:
804:
797:
779:
703:
702:
155:why have a trial?
75:
74:
54:length guidelines
16:(Redirected from
2317:
2276:
2266:
2260:
2251:
2245:
2244:
2242:
2240:
2225:
2219:
2213:
2207:
2206:
2204:
2202:
2191:, 2019 ONCA 262"
2183:
2177:
2176:
2174:
2172:
2161:, 2017 ONCA 783"
2153:
2147:
2146:
2144:
2142:
2131:, 2014 ONCA 450"
2123:
2117:
2111:
2105:
2104:
2102:
2100:
2085:
2079:
2078:
2070:
2064:
2063:
2051:
2040:
2034:
2032:
2030:
2009:
2000:
1994:
1983:
1977:
1974:
1968:
1962:
1956:
1953:
1947:
1946:
1939:
1928:
1927:
1922:. Archived from
1916:
1910:
1909:
1907:
1899:
1890:
1889:
1887:
1881:. Archived from
1880:
1872:
1863:
1862:
1857:. Archived from
1851:
1845:
1839:
1833:
1822:
1811:
1804:
1798:
1797:
1790:
1784:
1783:
1780:"Google Scholar"
1776:
1765:
1754:
1748:
1742:
1736:
1735:
1733:
1725:
1719:
1718:
1716:
1708:
1697:
1696:
1694:
1692:
1683:. Archived from
1677:
1671:
1670:
1668:
1666:
1661:on 28 March 2012
1660:
1654:. Archived from
1653:
1645:
1639:
1638:
1636:
1634:
1628:
1622:. Archived from
1621:
1613:
1607:
1606:
1604:
1602:
1597:on 31 March 2012
1596:
1590:. Archived from
1589:
1581:
1575:
1574:
1562:
1556:
1555:
1553:
1551:
1537:
1528:
1527:
1525:
1523:
1513:
1507:
1506:
1504:
1502:
1488:
1412:British Columbia
1371:Housing Act 1988
1100:legal memorandum
1078:in support from
1030:All issues/facts
800:
793:
789:
786:
780:
778:
737:
713:
705:
695:
688:
681:
492:
480:Summary judgment
475:Default judgment
225:Federal question
179:
147:sworn statements
83:summary judgment
70:
67:
61:
52:Please read the
38:
37:
30:
21:
2325:
2324:
2320:
2319:
2318:
2316:
2315:
2314:
2300:
2299:
2295:Wayback Machine
2284:
2279:
2267:
2263:
2252:
2248:
2238:
2236:
2227:
2226:
2222:
2214:
2210:
2200:
2198:
2185:
2184:
2180:
2170:
2168:
2155:
2154:
2150:
2140:
2138:
2125:
2124:
2120:
2112:
2108:
2098:
2096:
2087:
2086:
2082:
2072:
2071:
2067:
2060:
2049:
2042:
2041:
2037:
2028:
2007:
2002:
2001:
1997:
1984:
1980:
1975:
1971:
1963:
1959:
1954:
1950:
1941:
1940:
1931:
1926:on 27 May 2010.
1918:
1917:
1913:
1905:
1901:
1900:
1893:
1885:
1878:
1874:
1873:
1866:
1861:on 22 May 2010.
1853:
1852:
1848:
1840:
1836:
1830:25 Cal. 4th 826
1823:
1814:
1805:
1801:
1792:
1791:
1787:
1778:
1777:
1768:
1755:
1751:
1745:Scott v. Harris
1743:
1739:
1731:
1727:
1726:
1722:
1714:
1710:
1709:
1700:
1690:
1688:
1679:
1678:
1674:
1664:
1662:
1658:
1651:
1647:
1646:
1642:
1632:
1630:
1626:
1619:
1615:
1614:
1610:
1600:
1598:
1594:
1587:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1564:
1563:
1559:
1549:
1547:
1539:
1538:
1531:
1521:
1519:
1515:
1514:
1510:
1500:
1498:
1490:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1469:
1461:
1453:
1445:
1417:
1392:
1351:
1343:
1277:fastening holes
1252:
1246:
1204:
1190:
801:
790:
784:
781:
738:
736:
726:
714:
699:
670:
639:
606:
597:
566:
557:
553:Burden of proof
501:
490:
449:
440:Interrogatories
414:
348:
329:Cause of action
326:
296:Change of venue
279:
255:
246:
234:
222:
184:
183:Civil procedure
177:
172:
71:
65:
62:
51:
48:may be too long
43:This article's
39:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2323:
2321:
2313:
2312:
2310:Judgment (law)
2302:
2301:
2298:
2297:
2283:
2282:External links
2280:
2278:
2277:
2261:
2246:
2220:
2208:
2178:
2148:
2118:
2106:
2080:
2065:
2058:
2035:
1995:
1978:
1969:
1957:
1948:
1929:
1911:
1891:
1864:
1846:
1834:
1812:
1799:
1785:
1766:
1749:
1737:
1720:
1698:
1672:
1640:
1608:
1576:
1557:
1529:
1508:
1482:
1480:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1468:
1465:
1460:
1457:
1452:
1449:
1444:
1441:
1391:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1374:
1350:
1347:
1342:
1339:
1269:page numbering
1245:
1242:
1203:
1200:
1189:
1186:
1167:28 U.S.C.
1159:28 U.S.C.
1139:Google Scholar
1127:discovery plan
1068:
1067:
1057:
1054:All inferences
1051:
1045:
1039:
1033:
993:each and every
957:
956:
949:
942:
935:
920:
919:
916:
803:
802:
717:
715:
708:
701:
700:
698:
697:
690:
683:
675:
672:
671:
669:
668:
661:
653:
650:
649:
643:
642:
641:
640:
638:
637:
631:
625:
619:Attorney's fee
616:
611:
600:
598:
596:
595:
586:
581:
576:
571:
560:
556:
555:
550:
538:
531:
530:
529:
524:
513:
510:
509:
503:
502:
500:
499:
494:
487:
482:
477:
471:
468:
467:
463:
462:
461:
460:
455:
448:
447:
442:
437:
432:
426:
423:
422:
416:
415:
413:
412:
407:
402:
397:
392:
387:
382:
377:
372:
367:
357:
351:
350:
349:
347:
346:
336:
331:
320:
315:
314:
308:
307:
306:
305:
298:
290:
289:
283:
282:
281:
280:
278:
277:
269:
262:
249:
247:
245:
244:
238:
232:
227:
220:Subject-matter
216:
211:
210:
204:
203:
202:
201:
196:
188:
187:
176:
173:
171:
168:
73:
72:
42:
40:
33:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2322:
2311:
2308:
2307:
2305:
2296:
2292:
2289:
2286:
2285:
2281:
2275:
2271:
2265:
2262:
2258:
2257:
2256:Practical Law
2250:
2247:
2235:
2231:
2224:
2221:
2217:
2212:
2209:
2196:
2192:
2190:
2182:
2179:
2166:
2162:
2160:
2152:
2149:
2136:
2132:
2130:
2122:
2119:
2115:
2110:
2107:
2094:
2090:
2084:
2081:
2076:
2069:
2066:
2061:
2055:
2048:
2047:
2039:
2036:
2027:
2023:
2019:
2015:
2014:
2006:
1999:
1996:
1992:
1988:
1982:
1979:
1973:
1970:
1967:
1961:
1958:
1952:
1949:
1944:
1938:
1936:
1934:
1930:
1925:
1921:
1915:
1912:
1904:
1898:
1896:
1892:
1884:
1877:
1871:
1869:
1865:
1860:
1856:
1850:
1847:
1843:
1838:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1821:
1819:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1803:
1800:
1795:
1789:
1786:
1781:
1775:
1773:
1771:
1767:
1763:
1759:
1753:
1750:
1746:
1741:
1738:
1730:
1724:
1721:
1713:
1707:
1705:
1703:
1699:
1687:on 6 May 2007
1686:
1682:
1676:
1673:
1657:
1650:
1644:
1641:
1625:
1618:
1612:
1609:
1593:
1586:
1580:
1577:
1572:
1568:
1561:
1558:
1546:
1542:
1536:
1534:
1530:
1518:
1512:
1509:
1497:
1493:
1487:
1484:
1478:
1474:
1471:
1470:
1466:
1464:
1458:
1456:
1450:
1448:
1442:
1440:
1438:
1434:
1429:
1427:
1426:
1421:
1418:In 2014, the
1415:
1413:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1389:
1384:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1372:
1368:
1367:Rent Act 1977
1364:
1363:
1362:
1360:
1356:
1348:
1346:
1340:
1338:
1336:
1332:
1327:
1323:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1289:
1284:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1257:
1251:
1243:
1241:
1237:
1235:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1201:
1199:
1197:
1196:
1187:
1185:
1183:
1178:
1174:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1147:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1131:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1115:
1113:
1109:
1108:oral argument
1105:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1065:
1061:
1058:
1055:
1052:
1049:
1046:
1043:
1040:
1037:
1034:
1031:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1024:
1018:
1016:
1011:
1007:
1001:
999:
994:
988:
986:
977:
973:
970:
967:According to
965:
961:
954:
950:
947:
943:
940:
936:
933:
929:
925:
924:
923:
917:
914:
910:
909:
908:
907:
903:
899:
895:
891:
887:
882:
880:
876:
872:
867:
865:
862:
858:
854:
853:
848:
845:
841:
837:
836:
831:
828:
824:
820:
819:
814:
810:
799:
796:
788:
777:
774:
770:
767:
763:
760:
756:
753:
749:
746: –
745:
741:
740:Find sources:
734:
730:
724:
723:
718:This section
716:
712:
707:
706:
696:
691:
689:
684:
682:
677:
676:
674:
673:
667:
666:
662:
660:
659:
655:
654:
652:
651:
648:
644:
635:
632:
629:
626:
624:
623:American rule
620:
617:
615:
612:
610:
605:
602:
601:
599:
593:
591:
587:
585:
582:
580:
577:
575:
572:
570:
565:
562:
561:
559:
558:
554:
551:
548:
547:
542:
539:
537:
536:
532:
528:
525:
523:
520:
519:
518:
515:
514:
512:
511:
508:
504:
498:
495:
493:
488:
486:
483:
481:
478:
476:
473:
472:
470:
469:
464:
459:
456:
454:
451:
450:
446:
443:
441:
438:
436:
433:
431:
428:
427:
425:
424:
421:
417:
411:
410:Other motions
408:
406:
403:
401:
398:
396:
393:
391:
388:
386:
383:
381:
378:
376:
373:
371:
368:
365:
361:
358:
356:
353:
352:
344:
340:
337:
335:
332:
330:
325:
322:
321:
319:
318:
317:
316:
313:
309:
304:
303:
299:
297:
294:
293:
292:
291:
288:
284:
275:
274:
270:
268:
267:
263:
261:
260:
254:
251:
250:
248:
242:
239:
237:
233:
231:
228:
226:
221:
218:
217:
215:
214:
213:
212:
209:
205:
200:
197:
195:
192:
191:
190:
189:
186:
180:
175:United States
174:
169:
167:
165:
161:
156:
152:
148:
142:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
111:
108:
104:
100:
97:entered by a
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
69:
59:
55:
49:
47:
41:
32:
31:
19:
2273:
2264:
2255:
2249:
2237:. Retrieved
2233:
2223:
2215:
2211:
2199:. Retrieved
2194:
2188:
2181:
2169:. Retrieved
2164:
2158:
2151:
2139:. Retrieved
2134:
2128:
2121:
2116:, paras. 2-5
2113:
2109:
2097:. Retrieved
2092:
2083:
2068:
2045:
2038:
2026:the original
2017:
2011:
1998:
1990:
1981:
1972:
1960:
1951:
1924:the original
1914:
1883:the original
1859:the original
1849:
1837:
1825:
1802:
1788:
1761:
1752:
1744:
1740:
1723:
1689:. Retrieved
1685:the original
1675:
1663:. Retrieved
1656:the original
1643:
1631:. Retrieved
1624:the original
1611:
1599:. Retrieved
1592:the original
1579:
1570:
1566:
1560:
1550:17 September
1548:. Retrieved
1544:
1520:. Retrieved
1511:
1499:. Retrieved
1495:
1486:
1462:
1454:
1446:
1436:
1432:
1430:
1423:
1416:
1393:
1380:
1352:
1344:
1328:
1324:
1285:
1253:
1238:
1220:
1208:state courts
1205:
1193:
1191:
1181:
1179:
1175:
1148:
1132:
1116:
1104:cross-motion
1103:
1069:
1063:
1060:Light burden
1059:
1053:
1047:
1041:
1036:Whole record
1035:
1029:
1022:
1019:
1013:defendant's
1009:
1005:
1002:
997:
992:
989:
984:
982:
966:
962:
958:
952:
945:
938:
931:
927:
921:
905:
901:
897:
893:
889:
883:
868:
850:
833:
816:
806:
791:
782:
772:
765:
758:
751:
739:
727:Please help
722:verification
719:
663:
656:
628:English rule
589:
574:Renewed JMOL
544:
533:
479:
405:Intervention
400:Interpleader
375:Counterclaim
339:Class action
300:
273:Quasi in rem
271:
264:
257:
236:Supplemental
208:Jurisdiction
159:
154:
143:
112:
90:
86:
82:
76:
66:October 2023
63:
46:lead section
44:
2239:28 December
1691:1 September
1665:1 September
1633:1 September
1601:1 September
1212:U.S. states
1171:§ 1292
1163:§ 1291
1151:bench trial
1072:depositions
592:(new trial)
445:Depositions
259:In personam
1479:References
1331:under seal
1316:under seal
1248:See also:
1216:California
1076:affidavits
1064:de minimis
1042:In context
900:(usually,
785:April 2021
755:newspapers
665:Certiorari
609:Injunction
497:Settlement
380:Crossclaim
160:non-moving
115:common-law
1501:23 August
1273:fasteners
1265:font/size
1088:contracts
1086:(such as
1084:discovery
1080:witnesses
932:crediting
902:plaintiff
898:nonmovant
894:defendant
546:voir dire
527:defendant
522:plaintiff
430:Discovery
395:Impleader
324:Complaint
312:Pleadings
230:Diversity
135:discovery
56:and help
2304:Category
2291:Archived
2033:, at 696
1991:Lexology
1522:10 March
1467:See also
1312:stamping
1308:redacted
1304:children
1300:birthday
1225:oxymoron
1210:in most
953:material
939:disputed
871:American
658:Mandamus
564:Judgment
355:Demurrer
345:) )
343:2005 Act
253:Personal
95:judgment
2234:Westlaw
2201:26 July
2171:26 July
2141:26 July
2099:26 July
1832:(2001).
1451:Germany
1408:Alberta
1404:masters
1400:Ontario
1369:or the
1263:, text
1261:margins
1221:Aguilar
1195:de novo
1112:lawyers
1110:of the
1096:letters
946:genuine
811:of the
769:scholar
614:Damages
594: )
590:De novo
543: (
517:Parties
385:Joinder
362: (
341: (
241:Removal
93:, is a
2195:Canlii
2165:Canlii
2135:Canlii
2093:CanLii
2056:
1443:Turkey
1433:Hyniak
1396:Quebec
1390:Canada
1382:in rem
1281:strike
1169:
1161:
1092:emails
922:Here:
890:movant
771:
764:
757:
750:
742:
647:Appeal
604:Remedy
535:Pro se
360:Answer
266:In rem
2050:(PDF)
2029:(PDF)
2020:(2).
2008:(PDF)
1964:e.g.
1906:(PDF)
1886:(PDF)
1879:(PDF)
1732:(PDF)
1715:(PDF)
1659:(PDF)
1652:(PDF)
1627:(PDF)
1620:(PDF)
1595:(PDF)
1588:(PDF)
1459:China
1320:minor
1254:Many
906:both:
886:party
859:
842:
825:
776:JSTOR
762:books
507:Trial
370:Reply
287:Venue
131:trial
107:judge
103:trial
99:court
2241:2020
2203:2020
2173:2020
2143:2020
2101:2020
2054:ISBN
1824:See
1693:2011
1667:2011
1635:2011
1603:2011
1552:2021
1524:2021
1503:2019
1410:and
1318:. A
1165:and
985:full
913:fact
861:U.S.
844:U.S.
827:U.S.
748:news
541:Jury
149:and
127:jury
81:, a
1353:In
1121:in
1010:one
1006:one
998:all
926:An
869:In
864:574
857:475
847:242
840:477
830:317
823:477
731:by
113:In
89:or
79:law
77:In
2306::
2232:.
2193:.
2163:.
2133:.
2091:.
2018:37
2016:.
2010:.
1989:.
1932:^
1894:^
1867:^
1828:,
1815:^
1769:^
1760:.
1701:^
1571:84
1569:.
1543:.
1532:^
1494:.
1414:.
1337:.
1298:,
1294:,
1184:.
1094:,
1090:,
951:A
944:A
937:A
884:A
855:,
838:,
821:,
809:56
166:.
2274:.
2243:.
2205:.
2187:"
2175:.
2157:"
2145:.
2127:"
2103:.
2062:.
1993:.
1945:.
1908:.
1844:.
1796:.
1782:.
1734:.
1717:.
1695:.
1669:.
1637:.
1605:.
1573:.
1554:.
1526:.
1505:.
1385:.
1373:.
798:)
792:(
787:)
783:(
773:·
766:·
759:·
752:·
725:.
694:e
687:t
680:v
636:)
630:)
621:(
607:(
567:(
549:)
366:)
327:(
276:)
256:(
243:)
223:(
68:)
64:(
60:.
50:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.