Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 235,819 times 38 Legal AnalysesHolding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 112,942 times 38 Legal AnalysesHolding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
Brass v. American Film Technologies, Inc.
987 F.2d 142 (2d Cir. 1993) Cited 1,914 timesHolding that district courts may make use of "documents either in plaintiffs' possession or of which plaintiffs had knowledge and relied on in bringing suit" in evaluating Rule 12(b) motions
Fujitsu Ltd. v. Federal Exp. Corp.
247 F.3d 423 (2d Cir. 2001) Cited 978 times 6 Legal AnalysesHolding that conclusory allegations cannot defeat summary judgment
D'Amico v. the City of New York
132 F.3d 145 (2d Cir. 1998) Cited 1,099 timesHolding that party opposing summary judgment "may not rely on mere conclusory allegations nor speculation, but instead must offer some hard evidence showing that its version of the events is not wholly fanciful"
Seiden Associates, Inc. v. Anc Holdings, Inc.
959 F.2d 425 (2d Cir. 1992) Cited 636 timesHolding that "because the interrelationship of the two provisions . . . is susceptible to several reasonable interpretations . . . [i]t cannot be definitely and precisely gleaned which reading was intended by the parties" and extrinsic evidence is properly considered
Lasalle Bank Nat. Ass'n v. Nomura Asset Cap
424 F.3d 195 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 408 timesRecognizing that a contract “should be construed so as to give full meaning and effect to all of its provisions”
Intern. Multifoods Corp. v. Commercial Un. Ins. Co.
309 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2002) Cited 374 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding “[g]iven the competing inferences that can be drawn from the language,” the clause was ambiguous and remanding “for determination of the intent of the parties with respect to the meaning of” the clause
Sayers v. Rochester Telephone Corp.
7 F.3d 1091 (2d Cir. 1993) Cited 479 timesHolding that an "affidavit [wa]s immaterial to any determination of the parties' intent" because it was "[o]n the whole ... argumentative and conclusory"
Compagnie Financiere v. Merrill Lynch
232 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 301 timesFinding letters sent by the parties prior to the execution of an agreement to be probative extrinsic evidence
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,160 times 158 Legal AnalysesHolding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit