Ad
related to: supreme court summary judgment
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.Written by Associate Justice William Rehnquist, the decision of the Court held that a party moving for summary judgment need show only that the opposing party lacks evidence sufficient to support its case.
In law, a summary judgment, also referred to as judgment as a matter of law or summary disposition, [1] is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case.
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986), is a United States Supreme Court case articulating the standard for a trial court to grant summary judgment.Summary judgment will lie when, taking all factual inferences in the non-movant's favor, there exists no genuine issue as to a material fact and the movant deserves judgment as a matter of law.
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986), was an antitrust case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.It raised the standard for surviving summary judgment to unambiguous evidence that tends to exclude an innocent interpretation.
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving a lawsuit against a sheriff's deputy brought by a motorist who was paralyzed after the officer ran his eluding vehicle off the road during a high-speed car chase. [1]
On April 30, 2007, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the judgment of the Federal Circuit, holding that the disputed claim 4 of the patent was obvious under the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §103, and that in "rejecting the District Court’s rulings, the Court of Appeals analyzed the issue in a narrow, rigid manner inconsistent with §103 and our precedents," referring to the Federal Circuit ...
Hughes Court (February 24, 1930 – June 30, 1941) Stone Court (July 3, 1941 – April 22, 1946) Vinson Court (June 24, 1946 – September 8, 1953) Warren Court (October 5, 1953 – June 23, 1969) Burger Court (June 23, 1969 – September 26, 1986) Rehnquist Court (September 26, 1986 – September 3, 2005) Roberts Court (September 29, 2005 ...
The District Court, applying Chevron, granted summary judgment in favor of NMFS. Despite Chevron providing deference in the case of an ambiguously worded statute, the District Court found that the MSA unambiguously provides for industry-funded monitoring of the herring fishery, and thus concluded its analysis at the first step of Chevron .
Ad
related to: supreme court summary judgment