Motions for Summary Judgment (“MSJ”) are governed by Rule 56 of both Nevada and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. An MSJ seeks to effectively decide the merits of a claim, counterclaim, or crossclaim solely in the presence of a judge before the issue is presented at trial to a jury as our Las Vegas NV trial lawyer can explain. MSJs can be filed at any time but are often filed throughout litigation as discovery provides for more clear understandings of the factual scenarios that give rise to lawsuits. MSJs can also be filed in whole or in part (“MPSJ”). This means that a party may seek an MSJ on an entire negligence claim (i.e., an MSJ), or solely on the duty or damage elements of the negligence claim (i.e., an MPSJ).
MSJs are rarely granted because the standard required is extensive. Rule 56 states that a party moving for summary judgment is entitled thereto only if they can demonstrate that there is no issue of any material fact, and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This standard intertwines substantive with procedural law and holds that the substantive law controls what factual disputes are material. To determine material factual disputes, the court must reason and decide whether the evidence is sufficient enough to allow a rational trier of fact to return a verdict for a non-moving party. Often, this requires the court to review the pleadings, depositions, and written discovery.
For many years, Nevada had used the “slightest doubt” standard when reviewing MSJs and MPSJs. This required moving parties to demonstrate that there were no genuine triable issues of fact and that the record fails to demonstrate the slightest doubt that an issue exists. As a result, many of the cases that sought summary judgment were denied because of this rigid standard. In 2005, however, the Nevada Supreme Court adopted the federal standard discussed above in Wood v. Safeway. Our lawyers have won some of the largest verdicts in the history of the state of Nevada, so we have plenty of experience working in the state courts.
One of the principal purposes of summary judgment is to isolate and dispose of factually unsupported claims. One of the more common instances when an MSJ is filed is immediately after a lawsuit is initiated in lieu of an answer. In these instances, the moving party is seeking to have the entire case thrown out and generally argues that, based on the complaint alone, there is no supporting evidence, and instead, the allegations are only speculation and conjecture.
In addition to being filed for portions and elements of claims, MPSJs can be filed to dismiss improper or unsupported affirmative defenses. Similar to how Plaintiffs are required to allege their causes of action within the complaint, Defendants are required to allege their affirmative defenses within the answer. As the parties engage in discovery, claims and related defenses become clearer. When those affirmative defenses within the answer being unsupported, an MPSJ can be filed to dismiss the affirmative defense so that time at trial is not spent on such unsupported defenses.
If you are facing a case, contact Eglet Adams Eglet Ham Henriod for help; our lawyers have won more multi million dollar verdicts in Nevada than any other personal injury firms.
