In a summary judgment brief, which statement best reflects the objective regarding material facts?

In a summary judgment brief, which statement best reflects the objective regarding material facts?

• A. The court will resolve all factual disputes at trial
• B. The movant must argue new facts
• C. The movant seeks a ruling that there is no genuine dispute as to material facts
• D. The court will grant without comparing the evidence

Answer: (C)

In a summary judgment briefing, the key idea is that the moving party must show there is no genuine dispute about material facts. A material fact is one that could affect the outcome under the governing law. If the movant can demonstrate that no such factual dispute exists, the court can grant judgment as a matter of law without a trial. The court’s role is to review the admissible evidence—pleadings, affidavits or declarations, depositions, admissions, and similar materials—to determine whether a genuine dispute exists. If no genuine dispute remains, summary judgment is proper; if a reasonable jury could resolve a material fact in favor of the non-movant, the motion must be denied and the case goes to trial. Thus, the statement that best reflects the objective is that the movant seeks a ruling that there is no genuine dispute as to material facts. Other descriptions—such as the court resolving all factual disputes at trial, the movant needing to argue new facts, or the court granting without examining the evidence—do not fit the purpose of summary judgment, which hinges on evaluating the presented evidence to see if any material disputes exist.

In a summary judgment briefing, the key idea is that the moving party must show there is no genuine dispute about material facts. A material fact is one that could affect the outcome under the governing law. If the movant can demonstrate that no such factual dispute exists, the court can grant judgment as a matter of law without a trial. The court’s role is to review the admissible evidence—pleadings, affidavits or declarations, depositions, admissions, and similar materials—to determine whether a genuine dispute exists. If no genuine dispute remains, summary judgment is proper; if a reasonable jury could resolve a material fact in favor of the non-movant, the motion must be denied and the case goes to trial.

Thus, the statement that best reflects the objective is that the movant seeks a ruling that there is no genuine dispute as to material facts. Other descriptions—such as the court resolving all factual disputes at trial, the movant needing to argue new facts, or the court granting without examining the evidence—do not fit the purpose of summary judgment, which hinges on evaluating the presented evidence to see if any material disputes exist.