Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeal questions whether summary judgment below complied with Rule 56; court weighs remand options
Summary
On appeal in the James Duffin matter, counsel argued the trial court granted summary judgment without the required Rule 56 fact analysis and that remedies under Rule 26 (disclosure sanctions) — not dispositive judgment — were the correct response; opposing counsel says the record and exhibits provided sufficient basis.
The Utah Court of Appeals heard argument over whether a trial court improperly granted summary judgment against James ("Jimmy") Duffin after finding he failed to make required initial disclosures.
Julie Nelson, who represents James Duffin, told the panel the motion that led to summary judgment did not comply with Rule 56 requirements for a statement of undisputed material facts supported by record citations. "If you want summary judgment, you have to file a motion under…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
