Sentences with phrase «on a motion for summary judgment»

[49] There will be no genuine issue requiring a trial when the judge is able to reach a fair and just determination on the merits on a motion for summary judgment.
Her article gives a refreshing outlook on the legal assistant's perspective on motion for summary judgment.
Prepared recommendation memo for the court on a motion for summary judgment for a mortgage foreclosure case.
In the most recent case, a lawyer who appeared on the show had his claim against the CBC dismissed on a motion for summary judgment.
The Rules of Civil Procedure require that a responding party on a motion for summary judgment «must set out, in affidavit material or other evidence, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue requiring a trial».
In reviewing the factors in Rule 57.01 (1) and the relevant case law, Justice Healey noted that the applicant had total success on the motion for summary judgment and that there had been insufficient evidence to support the respondents» positions.
This is not a case where the standard of proof on a motion for summary judgment would be relaxed in the name of proportionality.
Generally, the contents of lawyers» affidavits of this sort can be ignored on motions for summary judgment: Victoria Mendes et al. v. Blaisdale Montessori School, 2014 ONSC 3178 (CanLII) at para. 3, aff'd 2014 ONCA 821 (CanLII).
He recently represented a small business in Montgomery County, MD which had been sued by a Fortune 500 hotel chain, winning on a motion for summary judgment.
[5] In the months following the amendments to Rule 20, it has become a matter of some controversy and uncertainty as to whether it is appropriate for a motion judge to use the new powers conferred by the amended Rule 20 to decide an action on the basis of the evidence presented on a motion for summary judgment.
The rescue captain argued that the demotion violated his First Amendment right to intimate association, but the lower court dismissed his case on a motion for summary judgment, concluding among other things that «Starling's First Amendment right to intimate association with Smith was not clearly established.»
In fact, during oral argument on the motion for summary judgment, Justice Schmidt allowed the plaintiff's counsel to supplement its written filings by presenting evidence to support each instance of an alleged breach of fiduciary duty.
Acting on a motion for summary judgment filed by Hueston Hennigan, U.S. District Court Judge William H. Orrick held that although courts «sparingly grant summary judgment in trademark cases because they are so fact - intensive,» the evidence here tilted so heavily in favor of the defendants as to make summary judgment appropriate.
The Supreme Court outlined a two - step test on a motion for summary judgment:
In my view, absent limited circumstances (such as a trial on damages once liability is determined), the Court should restrict itself from ordering a mini-trial when a party has chosen to tender a deficient evidentiary record on a motion for summary judgment, for a mini-trial ought not to permit a party to buttress or «cooper up» its deficient record.
Obtained dismissal on motion for summary judgment of complaint filed against international manufacturing company alleging whistleblower retaliation under the Florida Whistleblower Act.
[12] The Missouri Federal Court later upheld the order on a motion for summary judgment, agreeing that LegalZoom's platform went beyond a «do - it - yourself» service and crossed the boundary of unauthorized practice.
If on a motion for summary judgment, a judge can not dispose of the issues without a trial, it follows that a motion judge would be equally unable to determine, without the benefit of a trial, the issues to be decided on a SLAPP motion.
In Wallbridge v. Brunning, the Court of Appeal held that whether a law firm can be vicariously liable for defamatory statements made by a lawyer who practices «in association» with it (as opposed to being an associate employed by the law firm or a partner of the law firm), is an issue of general importance that should be determined at a trial and not on a motion for summary judgment.
Justice Healey ruled on the motion for summary judgment on February 28, 2014.
The motions judge dismissed the claim against one of the defendants on a motion for summary judgment, and subsequently ordered a focussed, hybrid trial to deal with the balance of the claims.
The Trademark Office in this case stated that in order to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to its intent to use on a motion for summary judgment, an applicant must rely on specific facts that establish the «existence of an ability and willingness to use the mark in the United States to identify [the goods in the application] at the time of the filing of the application.»
Following successful inter partes review petitions that eliminated several asserted patents, Covington prevailed on motions for summary judgment...
If the Court of Appeal is to be consistent, it is suggested that the only cases which will be dismissed pursuant to this proposed legislation are those cases that would similarly be dismissed on a motion for summary judgment.
On their motion for summary judgment, defendants argued that plaintiffs had not satisfied the loss causation requirement of Section 10 (b) because plaintiffs» losses were not caused by the revelation that First Solar had committed fraud.
On a motion for summary judgment, the motions judge found Mr. Baig liable for fraudulent misrepresentation.
The overall weight of each of the factors just noted (as well as any other relevant factors) will be determined when the case proceeds to the merits and all of the evidence is presented and assessed at trial or on a motion for summary judgment.
If during the balance of the notice period, the Defendant challenges the mitigation efforts or earnings of the Plaintiff and does not make such payments to the Plaintiff, the parties may deal with this dispute either on a motion for summary judgment, or by way of a trial of an issue.
He prevailed at claim construction and on motions for summary judgment to limit customers» claims of indirect infringement.
On a motion for summary judgment, the motion judge found that the teachers were wrongfully dismissed and awarded pay in lieu of the six months» notice that he found they should have received (2015 ONSC 15).
On a motion for summary judgment, a judge of the Federal Court determined that Brown was a public servant when the application was filed, and that omitting this information constituted an untrue material allegation, even though the Patent Act does not require this information to be included in an application.
In the recent case of Ryan v. Canadian Farm Insurance1 [«Ryan»], the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, on a motion for summary judgment, considered when someone under 21, and living in the same «household» as a named insured, may be «in their care» for coverage purposes.
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z