Topic: no room for credibility determinations, no room for the mea… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #4844

8 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 69 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 Laurence B. Greenburg, Etc. v. Puerto Rico Maritime Shipping Authority, Etc..

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Laurence B. Greenburg, Etc. v. Puerto Rico Maritime Shipping Authority, Etc. Anchor
ca1 · 1987
green “no room for credibility determinations, no room for the measured weighing of conflicting evidence such as the trial process entails, no room for the judge to superimpose his own ideas of probability and likelihood.” 20
2 Gannon v. Narragansett Electric Co.
rid · 1991
green “sjummary judgment is not appropriate merely because the facts offered by the moving party seem more plausible, or because the opponent is unlikely to prevail at trial.” 13
3 Gannon v. Narragansett Electric Co.
rid · 1991
green “summary judgment is not appropriate merely because the facts offered by the moving party seem more plausible, or because the opponent is unlikely to prevail at trial.” 12
4 Springfield Terminal Railway Co. v. Canadian Pacific Ltd.
ca1 · 1997
green “when the facts support plausible but conflicting inferences on a pivotal issue in the case, the judge may not choose between those inferences at the summary judgment stage.” 9
5 Iris v. Rivera-Flores v. Puerto Rico Telephone Company
ca1 · 1995
green “narrow the factual issues for trial.” 5
6 Springfield Terminal Railway Co. v. Canadian Pacific Ltd.
ca1 · 1997
green “wjhen the facts support plausible but conflicting inferences on a pivotal issue in the case, the judge may not choose between those inferences at the summary judgment stage.” 4
7 Iris v. Rivera-Flores v. Puerto Rico Telephone Company
ca1 · 1995
green “including the extent to which the amount of damages or other relief is not in controversy, and directing such further proceedings in the action as are just.” 3
8 URI Cogeneration Partners, L.P. v. Board of Governors for Higher Education
rid · 1996
green “including the extent to which the amount of damages or other relief is not in controversy, and directing such further proceedings in the action as are just.” 3

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