Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

Holding 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"

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Frank v. U.S. West, Inc.

Holding that parent liable for subsidiary's discrimination only when the two are integrated enterprises

Allen v. Muskogee, Oklahoma

Holding a rational jury could conclude officers' reckless conduct created lethal situation and that would constitute a violation of a decedent's Fourth Amendment rights

Concrete Works, Colo. v. City Cty of Denver

Holding that "post-enactment evidence, if carefully scrutinized for its accuracy, will often prove quite useful in evaluating the remedial effects or shortcomings of the race-conscious program"

Bryant v. Farmers Ins. Exch.

Holding that the calculation of the arithmetical mean of 103 numbers was "well within the ability of anyone with a grade-school education" and "aptly characterized as a lay opinion"

Trainor v. Apollo Metal Specialities, Inc.

Concluding that the jurisdictional claims and merits were intertwined where the issue was the defendant's status as an "employer" under the ADA

Comm. for the First Amendment v. Campbell

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by implicitly denying a Rule 56(d) motion through the grant of summary judgment

Wheeler v. Hurdman

Holding partners are not "employees" under Title VII, but distinguishing the case where an employee might be made a partner as "a sham" to enable subsequent discrimination

Bristol v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs of Clear Creek

Holding that because a "Board lacks the power to control the hiring, termination, or supervision of a Sheriff's employees, or otherwise control the terms and conditions of their employment, there can be no basis upon which a jury could determine that the Board owes a [duty to provide accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act]."

Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Rule 30 - Depositions by Oral Examination

Upholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely

Section 26-8.5-100.1 to 26-8.5-108 - [Repealed]

Section 395.1 - Terms

Defining "cafeteria" as "a food dispensing facility capable of providing a broad variety of prepared foods and beverages . . . primarily through the use of a line where the customer serves himself from displayed selections. . . . [t]able or booth seating facilities are always provided."