22 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 242,001 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence is "so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law"
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 221,285 times   41 Legal Analyses
    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"
  3. Jeffreys v. City of New York

    426 F.3d 549 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 2,370 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the nonmoving party may not rely on “conclusory allegations or unsubstantiated speculation”
  4. Springer v. Durflinger

    518 F.3d 479 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 733 times
    Holding that a plaintiff's "hunch about the defendant's motives" is insufficient to survive summary judgment
  5. Hedberg v. Indiana Bell Telephone Co., Inc.

    47 F.3d 928 (7th Cir. 1995)   Cited 948 times
    Holding "that an employer cannot be held liable under the ADA for firing an employee when it indisputably had no knowledge of the disability"
  6. Steen v. Myers

    486 F.3d 1017 (7th Cir. 2007)   Cited 490 times
    Holding "that summary judgment is 'not a dress rehearsal or practice run; it is the put up or shut up moment in a lawsuit, when a party must show what evidence it has that would convince a trier of fact to accept its version of events'" (quoting Hammel v. Eau Galle Cheese Factory, 407 F.3d 852, 859 (7th Cir. 2005))
  7. Spierer v. Rossman

    798 F.3d 502 (7th Cir. 2015)   Cited 195 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding no special relationship existed between social peers who drank alcohol together
  8. Reardon v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

    115 F. Supp. 3d 1090 (N.D. Cal. 2015)   Cited 30 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that text messages sent by Uber to potential drivers are not advertisements sent with the purpose to promote a good or service
  9. Gragg v. Orange Cab Co.

    995 F. Supp. 2d 1189 (W.D. Wash. 2014)   Cited 27 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding human intervention to send texts was "essential" to system's ability to dial and transmit the messages and as such system in question was not an ATDS
  10. Moore v. Firstsource Advantage, LLC

    07-CV-770 (W.D.N.Y. Sep. 15, 2011)   Cited 29 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that the “relevant issue in evaluating ‘prior express consent’ is whether a phone number has voluntarily been provided [by the debtor] to the creditor”
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 337,251 times   161 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Section 227 - Restrictions on use of telephone equipment

    47 U.S.C. § 227   Cited 5,814 times   744 Legal Analyses
    Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals