Cross-motion for summary judgment

Definition

A cross-motion for summary judgment is a request made by a party in a legal proceeding for the court to grant summary judgment in their favor, typically filed in response to an opposing party's motion for summary judgment. This procedural tactic allows both parties to seek a resolution without a trial, highlighting the lack of genuine issues of material fact and asserting that the law supports their position. It essentially puts both sides on the same playing field regarding the merits of the case.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. A cross-motion for summary judgment can be filed at any time after the initial motion for summary judgment is submitted by the opposing party.
2. When considering cross-motions for summary judgment, courts often analyze each motion independently, determining if either party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
3. If a cross-motion is granted, it can lead to a complete resolution of the case without the need for trial, saving time and resources.
4. The standard for granting a cross-motion is the same as for a regular motion for summary judgment; the moving party must show no genuine issues of material fact exist.
5. Cross-motions for summary judgment can complicate litigation, as both parties argue their cases simultaneously and courts must carefully assess conflicting evidence.

Review Questions

• What are the key considerations a court evaluates when reviewing cross-motions for summary judgment?
  • When reviewing cross-motions for summary judgment, courts look for genuine issues of material fact between the parties and apply the same legal standards as they would for any other motion. Each motion is assessed independently, meaning the court considers whether either party has proven that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The evidence presented must be viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, ensuring fairness in determining if either side should win without a trial.
• Discuss how cross-motions for summary judgment affect the overall strategy of both parties in litigation.
  • Cross-motions for summary judgment can significantly impact litigation strategy as they compel both parties to present their best arguments and evidence upfront. This dual approach can lead to more comprehensive legal briefs and strengthen each side's positions as they prepare to counter their opponent's claims. Furthermore, since either motion can resolve the case early on, parties may choose to settle disputes more readily rather than risk an unfavorable ruling from the court.
• Evaluate the implications of granting a cross-motion for summary judgment on future cases within similar legal contexts.
  • Granting a cross-motion for summary judgment not only resolves the current case but also sets important precedents that may influence future cases with similar legal contexts. It provides guidance on how courts interpret key legal principles and material facts, shaping how lawyers prepare their cases moving forward. Additionally, such rulings may encourage parties to consider early resolutions or settlements in similar disputes, recognizing that courts may lean towards swift determinations when evidence overwhelmingly favors one side.

Related terms

Summary Judgment: A legal decision made by the court without a full trial, concluding that there are no material facts in dispute and that one party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Motion: A formal request made to the court for a specific ruling or order regarding a legal issue within a case.

Material Fact: A fact that could affect the outcome of a case; its existence or non-existence may determine whether a party prevails in litigation.