Ads
related to: motion for summary judgment indiana courtuslegalforms.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
- Business Forms
Incorporation, LLC Formation Forms
State Specific Business Forms
- Landlord Tenant Forms
Commercial, Residential Lease Forms
State Specific Landlord Tenant Docs
- Estate Planning Forms
Last Will and Testament, Will Forms
State Specific Estate Planning Docs
- Affidavit Forms
General, Heirship Affidavit Forms
State Specific Affidavit Forms
- Business Forms
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The court must consider all designated evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the summary judgment motion. If a trial could result in the jury (or judge in a bench trial) deciding in favor of the party opposing the motion, then summary judgment is inappropriate. A decision granting summary judgment can be appealed without delay.
Lambda Legal filed Baskin v.Bogan in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on March 12, 2014, on behalf of three same-sex couples, all women. Their complaint named as defendants Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller and three county clerks, with one of the county clerks, Penny Bogan, in her official capacity, as the first-named defendant.
Regardless whether the dispositive motion is for summary judgment or adjudication, the motion must be supported by declarations under oath, excerpts from depositions which are also under oath, admissions of fact by the opposing party and other discovery such as interrogatories, as well as a legal argument (points and authorities). The other ...
In the United States courts, a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) is a motion made by a party, during trial, claiming the opposing party has insufficient evidence to reasonably support its case. [1] It asserts that the evidence allows only one result: victory for the moving party, even if a jury has found otherwise. [2]
But it also defeated the FRCP's objective of procedural uniformity. While virtually all U.S. lawyers understand the general principles of a FRCP 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss or a FRCP 56 motion for summary judgment, the actual details of making and opposing motions continue to vary dramatically from one federal district court to the next.
The court was unconvinced by this argument, and noted that Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad was a jointly owned subsidiary of Conrail and the Soo Line Railroad, corporations with pockets just as deep as American Cyanamid's. [8] The court concluded that concerns about distributional fairness did not therefore require imposing strict liability on ...
In April 2006, U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker granted summary judgment in favor of Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita. [3] In January 2007, that judgment was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, where Judge Richard Posner was joined by Judge Diane S. Sykes, while Judge Terence T. Evans dissented.
He found in favor of the plaintiff couples, granted them summary judgment and struck down Indiana's ban on same-sex marriage. He also removed Governor Mike Pence from the lawsuit. [35] He issued no stay and Indiana clerks began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples the day of the ruling. [36]
Ads
related to: motion for summary judgment indiana courtuslegalforms.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month