Filed September 15, 2017
Plaintiffs’ failure to properly address—or address at all—these material facts established in APA’s Cross-Motion deems them admitted and undisputed for the purpose of a summary judgment motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(2); Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 527 (2006) (since plaintiff failed to challenge the facts in the defendant’s statement of undisputed facts on Case 3:17-cv-00665-D Document 59 Filed 09/15/17 Page 7 of 19 PageID 1492 4 summary judgment, the facts were deemed admitted); Opp. at 1, citing Henson v. Geithner, No.
Filed January 28, 2016
See Statement of Facts, ¶¶ 2-19.5 On that point she offers nothing to defend herself and the key factual issues supporting Wells Fargo’s motion are entirely unopposed/undisputed. See Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 56(e) (permitting Courts to “consider the fact undisputed for purposes of the motion,” where “a party fails to properly…address another party’s assertion of fact,” as required in Rule 56(c)); Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 534 (2006) (holding a fact undisputed where plaintiff “did not offer any fact-based or expert-based refutation in the manner the rules provide”); see also Plaintiff’s Declaration In Support of Her Opposition, Dkt. 54-9 (silent on whether she willingly and knowingly manufactured her claims).
Filed May 11, 2012
If a non-moving party is unable to make a showing of specific facts to support its claim of a genuine issue requiring a trial, the law requires entry of a judgment in favor of the moving party. Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 529 (2006). Rule 56(d) allows for partial summary judgment to adjudicate some of the issues in the case, and authorizes an order specifying the facts that are deemed established for trial.
Filed April 6, 2012
However, where – as here – there is no genuine issue of material fact “the law requires entry of judgment” in the movant’s favor. Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 524 (2006) (emphasis added) (citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986)). In any event, all that has “evolved” here is the City’s changing defense of its ongoing take – first erroneously telling the Court that take of CRLF from pumping operations has been authorized by the FWS, see Pl.
Filed June 24, 2011
THE APPLICABLE STANDARD Summary judgment is appropriate where the pleadings, the discovery materials, and any affidavits show “that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); see also Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 529, 534 (2006) (granting summary judgment in constitutional challenge); Loper v. New York City Police Dep’t, 999 F.2d 699 (2d Cir. 1993) (affirming summary judgment entered by district court declaring state statute unconstitutional). Case 1:10-cv-08435-BSJ-JCF Document 29 Filed 06/24/11 Page 17 of 51 10 Since it is undisputed that Edie has been injured by virtue of having to pay a $363,000 estate tax, the only issue in this case is whether her injury violates the Constitution’s equal protection guarantee.
Filed December 12, 2016
SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD Summary judgment shall be granted if the record and evidence presented show there is no genuine issue related to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment in its favor as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a); Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521 (2006). The moving party must demonstrate by competent evidence that no issue of material fact exists.
Filed August 16, 2016
SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD Summary judgment shall be granted if the record and evidence presented show there is no genuine issue related to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment in its favor as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a); Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521 (2006). The moving party must demonstrate by competent evidence that no issue of material fact exists.
Filed May 19, 2016
The non- Case 1:15-cv-24224-KMW Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2016 Page 3 of 19 4 BlueRock Legal, P.A. • 10800 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 410, Miami, Florida 33161 moving party must then provide sufficient evidence showing that she can prevail on the merits. See Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 530 (2006). “The judgment sought should be rendered if the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Filed July 8, 2015
All doubts are resolved against the moving party, all evidence will be construed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all reasonable inferences will be drawn in the non-movant’s favor. Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 530-531 (2006); Hunt v. Cromartie, 526 U.S. 541, 550-555 (1999). In the case at bar, the Government cannot meet its burden of showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists.
Filed June 10, 2015
“Turner requires prison authorities to show more than a formalistic logical connection between a regulation and a penological objective.” Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 535 (2006). Yet, in approximately October 2014, the Defense Department imposed arbitrary new restrictions on Mr. Slahi’s detention conditions by depriving him without notice or explanation of the only comforts he has possessed over the course of his continuing ordeal.