Summary Judgments – Rule 35

Nature and Function of Summary Judgment

Summary judgment under Rule 35 is a procedural device for deciding an action, claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or request for declaratory relief without a full trial when the record shows that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Its object is to separate a real controversy requiring trial from a case in which a party merely creates the appearance of factual dispute through denials, conclusions, or sham issues. It does not authorize the court to try disputed facts on affidavits; it authorizes judgment only when there is nothing factual left for trial except, when appropriate, the amount of damages.

The rule is consistent with due process because the adverse party is given notice and an opportunity to oppose the motion through competent evidentiary materials. The shortened mode of adjudication is justified only by the absence of a genuine triable issue, not by the court's assessment that one party is more likely to prevail after trial.

When Summary Judgment May Be Sought

A claimant may seek summary judgment after the pleading in answer to the claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or petition for declaratory relief has been served. This timing is important because the answer normally defines whether material facts are admitted, denied, or put in issue.

A defending party may seek summary judgment at any time against a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or request for declaratory relief asserted against that party. The defending party may rely on the complaint, the answer, admissions, depositions, affidavits, or other proper materials to show that the claimant cannot establish a legally sufficient factual basis for relief.

Summary judgment may cover the whole case or only a part of it. A court may render judgment on liability while reserving the amount of damages for further proceedings, or it may dispose of one claim while leaving separate claims or issues for trial.

Requisites

Rule 35 rests on two controlling requisites: first, there must be no genuine issue as to any material fact; second, the moving party must be entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

• No genuine issue means that the asserted factual dispute is not real, substantial, and triable. A sham, fictitious, contrived, or purely formal issue does not prevent summary judgment.
• Material fact means a fact that can affect the outcome under the governing substantive law. A dispute over an immaterial detail does not require trial.
• Entitlement as a matter of law means that, taking the undisputed material facts in their proper legal setting, the law commands judgment for the movant.
• Damages exception means that an unresolved question on the amount of damages does not defeat summary judgment on liability when liability is otherwise clear from the record.

If a material fact is genuinely disputed, summary judgment must be denied even if the court believes the movant's evidence is stronger. The court's task is to determine whether a trial is necessary, not to decide which party's version is more credible.

Genuine Issue and Sham Issue

A genuine issue exists when the pleadings and supporting materials show a real factual controversy that must be resolved by the presentation and weighing of evidence at trial. It is not enough that the adverse party has filed a denial; the denial must correspond to a material fact and must be supported by circumstances showing that the dispute is bona fide.

A sham issue is an issue raised in form but not in substance. It may appear where the answer consists of general denials, unsupported conclusions, evasive allegations, or factual assertions contradicted by the party's own admissions or by documents whose authenticity and relevance are not genuinely disputed.

Issues involving intent, fraud, negligence, bad faith, knowledge, state of mind, or credibility often require trial because they usually depend on testimony, circumstances, and evaluation of conduct. They do not automatically defeat summary judgment, however, when the record leaves no real dispute about the material facts from which the legal consequence follows.

Materials Considered by the Court

The court may consider the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, admissions, and other materials properly on record. Admissions may arise from pleadings, stipulations, pre-trial proceedings, requests for admission, depositions, or other formal acts that bind the party in the case.

Affidavits supporting or opposing summary judgment must be made on personal knowledge, must state facts admissible in evidence, and must show that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated. An affidavit based on hearsay, legal conclusions, speculation, or matters outside the affiant's competence cannot create or eliminate a genuine issue.

Copies of documents referred to in an affidavit should be sworn or certified and attached or served with the affidavit when the document is relied upon as part of the factual showing. This requirement prevents a party from obtaining summary judgment through unsupported references to unproduced papers.

Burden of the Movant and Response of the Adverse Party

The moving party bears the initial burden of demonstrating clearly that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact and that the law entitles the movant to judgment. Because summary judgment cuts off trial, uncertainty about a material factual dispute is resolved in favor of allowing trial.

Once the movant makes a proper showing, the adverse party must respond with specific facts drawn from affidavits, depositions, admissions, or other competent materials. The adverse party cannot rely solely on bare allegations in the pleadings, general denials, or arguments of counsel.

The burden imposed on the adverse party is not a burden to prove the entire case in advance. It is a burden to show that a real and material factual controversy exists and that the controversy is fit for trial.

Procedure

A motion for summary judgment must identify the claim or part of the claim on which judgment is sought and must be supported by the evidentiary materials relied upon. It should direct the court to the material facts alleged to be undisputed and to the legal rule that makes judgment proper on those facts.

The adverse party must be given a fair opportunity to oppose the motion by submitting counter-affidavits, depositions, admissions, or other proper materials. Under the amended rules on motions, summary judgment is treated as a litigious motion, so the written opposition and the court's authority to require or dispense with oral hearing must be understood together with the specific requirements of Rule 35.

After the required submissions and any hearing directed by the court, judgment must be rendered if the record shows the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact and the movant's entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. If that showing is not made, the case proceeds to trial on the disputed matters.

Partial Summary Judgment

When the whole case cannot be adjudicated by summary judgment, the court must ascertain which material facts are actually and in good faith controverted and which facts exist without substantial controversy. The court may do this by examining the pleadings and evidence and by questioning counsel during the hearing or proceedings on the motion.

The court should issue an order specifying the facts that appear without substantial controversy, including the extent to which the amount of damages or other relief is not in controversy. The action then proceeds only on the controverted facts and on the remaining relief requiring trial.

A partial summary adjudication that merely narrows issues is generally interlocutory because it does not finally dispose of the case or of a complete claim. It nevertheless binds the subsequent trial by treating the specified facts as established, thereby preventing parties from relitigating matters already determined to be undisputed.

Bad Faith Affidavits

Rule 35 authorizes sanctions when affidavits are presented in bad faith or solely for delay. The court may order the offending party or counsel to pay the reasonable expenses caused by the improper affidavit, including attorney's fees, and may also punish the offending party or counsel for contempt.

This sanction protects summary judgment practice from abuse. A party may resist summary judgment by showing a real factual dispute, but a party may not manufacture delay through affidavits that are false, evasive, conclusory, or submitted only to obstruct adjudication.

Limits on Summary Judgment

Summary judgment is improper where the pleadings and materials disclose a genuine dispute over facts essential to the cause of action or defense. It is likewise improper when the issue requires evaluation of credibility, weighing of conflicting evidence, or determination of facts from competing inferences that a trial court must draw after hearing witnesses.

The rule cannot be used to deny a party the right to present evidence on a material factual issue merely because the court considers the party's proof weak. Weakness of proof may justify judgment after trial or after a proper demurrer to evidence, but it does not justify summary judgment if a genuine factual issue remains.

Summary judgment is also inappropriate in proceedings where the law or governing procedure requires proof despite admissions or default, especially in cases involving civil status or matters affected with public interest. In such cases, the court must receive the proof required by law rather than decide solely on the parties' concessions.

Comparison With Related Modes of Judgment

Effect of a Summary Judgment

A summary judgment disposing of the whole case is a final judgment on the merits. It determines the rights and obligations of the parties on the undisputed facts and is subject to the ordinary rules on finality, execution, and appellate review.

A summary judgment disposing of an entire claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or separable part of the case may be final as to that adjudicated matter, depending on whether anything remains for the court to do with respect to that claim or party. An order that merely declares certain facts established for trial is not the same as a final judgment.

Denial of summary judgment ordinarily does not adjudicate the merits. It merely means that trial is necessary because a genuine issue exists or because the movant has not shown entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.

Remedies

A final summary judgment may be challenged through the ordinary remedies available from a final judgment, including appeal when appeal is the proper mode. The reviewing court examines whether the record indeed showed no genuine issue of material fact and whether the movant was entitled to judgment under the applicable law.

An order denying summary judgment is generally interlocutory and is not appealable before final judgment. The proper course is to proceed to trial, without prejudice to raising the issue on appeal from the final judgment or, in exceptional cases, through certiorari when the denial or grant of relief is attended by grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

When summary judgment is granted despite a genuine issue of material fact, the error is substantial because it deprives the affected party of the opportunity to prove or disprove facts at trial. When summary judgment is denied despite the absence of a genuine issue, the error causes unnecessary trial but does not ordinarily foreclose adjudication on the merits.

Operational Principles

• Summary judgment is proper only when the material facts are undisputed and the remaining question is legal.
• A factual issue must be both genuine and material to defeat the motion.
• The court does not weigh evidence or resolve credibility when acting on the motion.
• The movant must make a clear initial showing; the adverse party must then point to specific facts showing a real controversy.
• Affidavits must be based on personal knowledge and must state admissible facts by competent affiants.
• Admissions in pleadings, discovery, stipulations, and pre-trial proceedings may support summary judgment.
• Partial summary judgment narrows the trial by establishing undisputed facts or adjudicating separable claims.
• An unresolved amount of damages does not prevent judgment on liability when liability is otherwise free from genuine factual dispute.
• Bad faith affidavits may lead to expenses, attorney's fees, and contempt.
• The rule promotes speedy disposition, but it yields whenever a real trial of material facts is required.