PRETRIAL ADJUDICATION
...Summary Judgment & Summary Adjudication
......Ruling on Motion
.........Three-Step Process
 18 Cards On This Topic:
  • Court reverses SJ for husband’s employer in wrongful death case where there are triable issues as to whether P wife harbored a good faith belief her marriage was valid and she was a putative spouse.
  • D who moves for SJ must prevail on basis of own affidavits and admissions made by P; unless D’s showing sufficient, no burden on P to file counteraffidavits.
  • SJ procedure is designed to discover, through affidavits, whether there are triable issues of fact.
  • SJ for D affirmed where risk of injury from lifting heavy boxes that might be labeled with inaccurate weight info was inherent in P's job as a UPS driver, and D did not owe a duty to protect him from that risk.
  • SJ motion for ins. co. reversed where P's med-pay action would not be double recovery—P was alleging company breached its direct duty to him under med-pay, a duty distinct from its obligation to primary D under liability provision.
  • Trial ct’s three-step process to resolve motions for SJ.
  • Though D did not meet burden of showing P’s causes of action lacked merit, P’s own evidence from D’s depo proved P could not prove cause of action and provided basis for granting SJ to D.
  • By meeting burden of producing evidence showing Ps’ C/A without merit, burden shifted to Ps, who failed to prove case.
  • Pleadings define issues for SJ and SA; SJ motion cannot be used to expand scope of complaint.
  • SJ inappropriate where record shows credible evidence on both sides of material issue.
  • If SJ motion prima facie justifies judgment in movant’s favor, opposing party’s counteraffidavits and decls must disclose triable issue.
  • Determination whether facts have been adduced presenting triable issues to be made in light of pleadings.
  • D moving for SJ must set forth with particularity competent evidentiary facts sufficient to establish every element necessary to sustain judgment in his/her favor.
  • Failure to file a counter affidavit does not of itself entitle party to a summary judgment.
  • If moving party fails to prove case, not necessary for ct. to evaluate responding party’s evidence.
  • Ct. will not look to counter-affidavits unless moving party proves as matter of law it is entitled to SJ; respondent may well win motion without filing counter-decls or other evidence.
  • Responding party’s failure to file counter affidavit did not itself entitle movant to SJ.
  • SJ for P cannot be ordered unless s/he presents affidavits in support of his/her motion showing entitlement to judgment.


    •