Topic: inferences contrary to those drawn by the trial court might… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #11429

4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 33 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Milo John Munson v. Wendell R. Friske, John Rybak, Jr., Kenneth Todd, and Ashland County.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Milo John Munson v. Wendell R. Friske, John Rybak, Jr., Kenneth Todd, and Ashland County Anchor
ca7 · 1985
green “inferences contrary to those drawn by the trial court might be permissible,” 10
2 Edward R. POSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SKYLINE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee
ca7 · 1983
green “a bare contention that an issue of fact exists is insufficient to raise a factual issue” 8
3 International Administrators, Inc. And Sheldon Harrison v. Life Insurance Company of North America
ca7 · 1985
green “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” 8
4 Charles E. Egger v. Harlan C. Phillips
ca7 · 1983
green “factual dispute does not preclude summary judgment unless ... the disputed fact is outcome determinative under the governing law.” 7

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check