Also known as: FRCP 56(a) · Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) · Rule 56(a) FRCP · FRCP 56 · Rule 56
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural rule authorizing a court to enter judgment without trial when the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The rule requires the court to examine the record as a whole and to view all evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant while drawing all reasonable inferences in the nonmovant's favor. The moving party bears the initial burden of production to demonstrate the absence of a triable issue, after which the nonmovant must respond with specific facts supported by admissible evidence showing a genuine dispute on a material issue.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Ridgeway Partners filed a motion to dismiss a contract claim under Rule 12(b)(6) and attached an affidavit from its project manager describing the sequence of deliveries. The court considered the affidavit without excluding it. The motion must be treated as one for summary judgment under Rule 56, and the parties receive a reasonable opportunity to present all pertinent material before the court decides whether any genuine dispute of material fact exists.
Regina Robinson sued a federal agency alleging injury from a regulatory change that affected her property. The agency moved for summary judgment and submitted affidavits showing that Robinson had not visited the site in over a decade. Robinson responded with declarations from two associates who planned future visits. The court must determine whether the declarations create a genuine issue of material fact on the injury element of standing.
Ronald Reed alleged that two telecommunications firms conspired to suppress competition. The firms moved for summary judgment after discovery and produced internal pricing documents showing independent decisions. Reed offered only an expert report speculating about parallel conduct. The court examines whether the record permits a reasonable inference of conspiracy or whether the evidence is consistent with lawful independent action.
Rebecca Ross sued a manufacturer for asbestos exposure and claimed that its product caused her illness. The manufacturer moved for summary judgment and pointed to the absence of any evidence linking its product to her workplace. Ross produced no affidavits or documents identifying the product. The court must decide whether the movant has shown that no genuine dispute exists on the causation element.
Roger Ramirez claimed that a department store refused him service because of his race. The store moved for summary judgment and submitted affidavits from employees stating that no discriminatory policy existed. Ramirez responded with evidence that white customers received service in similar circumstances. The court must determine whether the circumstantial evidence creates a genuine dispute of material fact on discriminatory treatment.
Rosalind Reed sued her former employer for age discrimination after termination. The employer moved for summary judgment and produced performance reviews documenting deficiencies. Reed submitted her own affidavit asserting that the reviews were fabricated. The court must decide whether the affidavit creates a genuine dispute of material fact or whether the employer's evidence entitles it to judgment as a matter of law.
A party may move for summary judgment at any time until 30 days after the close of all discovery unless the court orders otherwise. The rule permits the motion after merits discovery closes even if class-certification discovery remains open. Courts routinely entertain such motions once the relevant factual record is complete.
Supporting sources
The nonmovant must respond with specific facts supported by admissible evidence showing a genuine dispute on a material issue. Mere conclusory assertions or denials are insufficient. The response must cite particular parts of materials in the record or show that the materials cited by the movant do not establish the absence of a genuine dispute.
…respondents' evidentiary burden ( i. e. , affidavits asserting "specific facts") in withstanding a summary judgment motion under Rule 56(e) with the standard of proof ( i. e. , the existence of a "genuine issue" of "material fact") under Rule 56(c). 1 Were the Court to apply the proper standard for summary judgment,…
…stage, rest solely on the inferences that may be drawn from the parallel conduct of the defendants. In order to survive a Rule 56
…as to those facts. Fed. Rule
…Rule 12 (c) allows such evidence to be admitted, requiring the court then to treat the motion as one for summary judgment under
…the issue of fact must be "genuine." Fed.
Supporting sources
A party may object that cited material cannot be presented in admissible form. The court evaluates the objection on its merits and may sustain it when no custodian or foundation witness is available to authenticate the material. Sustaining the objection prevents the court from relying on the material to grant summary judgment.
Supporting sources
A factual dispute is immaterial when it does not affect the outcome under the governing substantive law. Minor conflicts in evidence that leave every version of events within an exclusion or defense do not create a genuine dispute of material fact. The court may grant summary judgment when no reasonable jury could find for the nonmovant on the disputed point.
Supporting sources