What is summary adjudication

The application to continue the motion to obtain necessary discovery may also be made by ex parte motion at any time on or before the date the opposition response to the motion is due.

This section does not affect or limit the ability of a party to compel discovery under the Civil Discovery Act Title 4 commencing with Section Upon entry of an order pursuant to this section, except the entry of summary judgment, a party may, within 20 days after service upon him or her of a written notice of entry of the order, petition an appropriate reviewing court for a peremptory writ. If the notice is served by mail, the initial period within which to file the petition shall be increased by five days if the place of address is within the State of California, 10 days if the place of address is outside the State of California but within the United States, and 20 days if the place of address is outside the United States.

If the notice is served by facsimile transmission, express mail, or another method of delivery providing for overnight delivery, the initial period within which to file the petition shall be increased by two court days. The superior court may, for good cause, and before the expiration of the initial period, extend the time for one additional period not to exceed 10 days. The supplemental briefs may include an argument that additional evidence relating to that ground exists, but the party has not had an adequate opportunity to present the evidence or to conduct discovery on the issue.

The court may reverse or remand based upon the supplemental briefs to allow the parties to present additional evidence or to conduct discovery on the issue. If the court fails to allow supplemental briefs, a rehearing shall be ordered upon timely petition of a party.

Once the plaintiff or cross-complainant has met that burden, the burden shifts to the defendant or cross-defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.

Instead, both sides generally ignore them at trial. I am not suggesting that this is the preferred or safest approach. In an insurance case I worked on recently, I wanted to move for summary adjudication on the issue of coverage. I probably could have, based on the Lloyds case cited above. As result, the entire issue of coverage was indisputably made subject to summary adjudication.

This brings me to the next tip: Make sure that, if you are filing a motion for summary adjudication, you comply with Rule 3. Few things are more demoralizing than having a viable summary adjudication motion which the court denies for failure to comply with this requirement. By the same token, when you are opposing a defense motion, make sure that the way the issues have been stated in the notice are identical to the way they are framed in the separate statement.

If not, point out the violation to the court. Odds are, the court will deny the motion on that basis alone. It should be obvious that every fact you include in a separate statement in support of a motion for summary adjudication must, in fact, be undisputed.

Of course, the defense will likely find a way to dispute every fact. That is simply what the defense does. When drafting your separate statement the best way to ensure that each fact will be indisputable is to avoid compound factual statements. Each fact should really only make a single factual assertion. The separate statement is just the factual predicate. Keep it as simple as possible. So, in drafting a separate statement make sure each fact you include is material to the claim.

The ultimate goal is to have the trial court conclude that the sum total of undisputed facts you have included in support of the motion means that you win — you have established that a defense has no merit or that a duty is owed. The facts simply were not material. As a result, at the end of the day, what the defendant put before the court was simply a series of undisputed facts which, when taken together, did not establish that the claim had no merit or that the plaintiff could not establish one or more elements of the claim.

This kind of motion is fun to argue, because the defense will emphasize that all of the facts in its separate statement are undisputed. And I freely admit this, and explain that this is because they fail to include the material disputed facts on which liability turns.

I tend to litigate a lot of insurance cases, and both sides in these cases tend to quote parts of the policy in their separate statements. Moreover, a summary adjudication holding can be reconsidered by a trial court sua sponte if it believes that the holding was erroneous. However, if a court decides to do so, it must give all parties notice and a hearing for the parties to litigate the question.

While both are pre-trial devices, summary adjudication differs from summary judgment in that the latter disposes of the entire case, whereas summary adjudication resolves selected issues, leaving the remaining ones to be settled at trial. Summary Adjudication. Previous Next. Related Posts. Go to Top.