Appeals from the granting of a summary
judgment motion go directly to the Court of Appeal, but appeals from the denial of such a motion go to the Divisional Court, and only then with leave.
Not exact matches
If you respond, your case can
go to trial or the lender can seek a
motion for summary
judgment.
The district will immediately
go to court to affirm the SRC's action, filing a
motion for declaratory
judgment with the Pennsylvania Department of Education as co-plaintiff.
Defendants have claimed that they are
going to file a
motion for summary
judgment right about... now - ish in court terms.
If Ellora's Cave intends to keep up with the suit — responding to discovery, filing for protective
motions, writing responsive briefs in reply to
motions for summary
judgment — it's almost certainly
going to have to spend as much as Jane.
[17] Unlike these procedural
motions,
motions for summary
judgment go to the heart of the merits of the dispute between the clients.
He
went on to state that «how a summary
judgment motion should be scheduled where case management does not exist or where the judges frequently circuit, I leave to other judges to consider and decide.»
For example, if somebody comes in with one day to
go with a huge summary
judgment motion or other big task, the answer is I'm sorry, had you only come in two weeks ago, I would've been glad to help you.
As a matter of practice, the Supreme Court indicates the judge hearing the
motion for directions «should generally be seized of the summary
judgment motion itself,» ensuring his or her acquired knowledge about the matter does not
go to waste.
Hryniak
goes beyond simply endorsing summary
judgment; indeed, the Supreme Court lists a number of tools it believes can be used to maximize the efficiency of a summary
judgment motion.
«It
goes without saying that certification has nothing to do with the merits of the claims that have been made, Deloitte may well prevail when all of the evidence is presented and assessed at trial or on a summary
judgment motion,» he wrote.
Much more recently, however, the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Hryniak v. Mauldin held that «a trial is not required if a summary
judgment motion can achieve fair and just adjudication... and is a proportionate, more expeditious and less expensive means to achieve a just result than
going to trial».
Our litigation track record is proof of our sound
judgment about when to
go to trial, pursue an appeal, or bring a summary
judgment motion.
The resulting decision (s)(known to most as «Combined Air») provided, arguably, clarity to
motion judges
going forward and set out which types of cases are and are not suitable for summary
judgment.
Justice Bale found that the issue was whether the proposed summary
judgment motion was likely to provide a «proportionate, more expeditious and less expensive means to achieve a just result than
going to trial», citing the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Hyrniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7.
For personal injury lawyers we require proof of 3 cases that have
gone to trial in the last 5 years resulting in verdict for that lawyer and we also require 2
motions for summary
judgment ruled in favor of that attorney.
I am not
going to comment on whether or not I believe that the discovery process should be permitted in all cases to run its course when a
motion for summary
judgment is pending.
I mean we're doing this recording on May the 9th and a
motion for summary
judgment is
going to be filed on May the 24th.
Imax's summary
judgment motion based on a limitation defence was denied yesterday, giving the class action bar cause for celebration in light of other recent decisions that seem to
go against plaintiffs in similar circumstances where lengthy proceedings have delayed matters.
The appellants submit that while Hryniak modified this court's decision in Combined Air in some respects, it did not disturb this court's instruction, at para. 65, that while the court may use rule 20.05 «to salvage the resources that
went into the summary
judgment motion,» the rule «should not be applied so as to effectively order a trial that resembles the
motion that was previously dismissed....