Summary Judgment

MBEMax wiki article — paired with the Civil Procedure question set on mbemax.com.

One-line summary

Summary judgment (Rule 56) is granted when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law — an important checkpoint between pleadings and trial.

Mnemonic

N-G-M-F — No Genuine dispute of Material Fact → judgment as a matter of law.

Think "No Genuine Material Fact" and the judge needs no jury.

The rule (plain-language)

A party may move for summary judgment identifying each claim or defense on which it seeks judgment. The court must grant the motion if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, no reasonable jury could find for that party on any material element.

Standard — Celotex / Matsushita / Anderson trilogy

• Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) — movant without burden of persuasion at trial may meet its burden by pointing out the absence of evidence supporting a required element. Does not need to produce affirmative evidence of its own.
• Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) — "genuine" dispute requires evidence on which a reasonable jury could return a verdict for non-movant, judged by substantive evidentiary standard (e.g., clear-and-convincing in defamation).
• Matsushita Electric v. Zenith Radio, 475 U.S. 574 (1986) — when claim is implausible or implies conspiracy, non-movant must produce more persuasive evidence to survive.

Procedure (Rule 56)

• Timing. Motion must be filed at any time until 30 days after close of discovery, unless the court sets a different time.
• Form. Motion must be supported by citations to particular parts of materials in the record (pleadings, depositions, documents, affidavits, admissions, interrogatory answers, stipulations).
• Response. Opposing party must show genuine dispute by citing to record; cannot rely on mere allegations.
• Affidavits / declarations. Must be on personal knowledge, set out admissible facts, and show competence.
• Partial summary judgment. Available on specific issues or parts of claims.
• Independent movement. Court may grant summary judgment on its own after notice and reasonable time.
• Rule 56(d) — if non-movant needs more time for discovery, court may defer, deny, or order discovery.

Material fact

A fact is "material" if it could affect the outcome under the applicable substantive law. Not every factual dispute blocks summary judgment — only those tied to essential elements.

Genuine dispute

• Must have more than a "scintilla" of evidence.
• Cannot rest on speculation, conclusory allegations, or credibility-only disputes at summary judgment stage.
• Summary judgment should not weigh evidence or make credibility determinations — those are for trial.

Standards vs. Rule 12(b)(6)

• Rule 12(b)(6) — tests pleading sufficiency (plausibility; Twombly, Iqbal); confined to face of complaint; no evidence.
• Rule 56 — tests evidence; looks at record outside pleadings.

NCBE loves to test

• Celotex shifting. Movant without trial burden can just point to absence of evidence. Non-movant must then produce admissible evidence.
• Standard applied. Reasonable jury, in light most favorable to non-movant.
• Admissibility of supporting materials. Evidence must be of a type admissible at trial — not necessarily in admissible form now. Affidavits on personal knowledge OK.
• Hearsay in affidavits. Inadmissible hearsay cannot create genuine issue unless it can be reduced to admissible form at trial.
• Credibility. Court cannot grant summary judgment based on its own credibility determinations.
• Conversion of 12(b)(6). If matters outside pleadings presented and not excluded, 12(b)(6) treated as summary judgment; parties must get reasonable opportunity to present all material.
• Rule 56(d) delay. Non-movant can request delay to complete discovery with affidavit showing need.

Fast hypos

Hypo 1. Defendant moves for summary judgment on plaintiff's breach-of-contract claim, arguing plaintiff has no evidence of the alleged oral agreement. Celotex — defendant can meet its burden by pointing out absence of plaintiff's evidence; plaintiff must respond with admissible evidence.

Hypo 2. Plaintiff in a defamation action offers affidavit that defendant "must have known the statement was false because everyone knew." Anderson applied with clear-and-convincing standard — conclusory affidavit insufficient for actual malice.

Hypo 3. Parties submit dueling affidavits on a crucial fact. Genuine dispute — summary judgment denied; court cannot weigh credibility.

Hypo 4. Motion filed before discovery complete. Non-movant lacks evidence because depositions not taken. Rule 56(d) — non-movant may request deferral with affidavit identifying facts needed.

Case anchors

• Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) — burden-shifting.
• Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) — standard of "genuine issue."
• Matsushita Electric v. Zenith Radio, 475 U.S. 574 (1986) — implausibility and tender of evidence.
• Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014) — reminder that court must view evidence in light most favorable to non-movant.
• Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) — video evidence may blatantly contradict non-movant's version, defeating dispute.

See also

• Discovery
• Preclusion — Claim
• Erie Doctrine
• Personal Jurisdiction

Sources

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), 12(d), 56; Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986); Matsushita Electric v. Zenith Radio, 475 U.S. 574 (1986); Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014); Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007).