- 11 -
In Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986), the
Supreme Court described the "showing" that must be made by the
moving party:
a party seeking summary judgment always bears
the initial responsibility of informing the
* * * court of the basis for its motion, and
identifying those portions of "the pleadings,
depositions, answers to interrogatories, and
admissions on file, together with the
affidavits, if any," which it believes
demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of
material fact. * * *
In Celotex, the Supreme Court held that the moving party in
a summary judgment action need not in all cases introduce
evidence negating an essential element of the opponent's claim in
order to prevail on the motion. If the moving party, after
adequate time for discovery, can make a "showing" from the record
of "a complete failure of proof concerning an essential element
of the nonmoving party's case" and on which the nonmoving party
will bear the burden of proof at trial, there can be "'no genuine
issue as to any material fact,'" with respect to that claim. Id.
at 322-323.18
Petitioner at pages 4 and 5 of his reply to respondent's
objection to petitioner's motion, attempts to bring his case
18See also Fontenot v. Upjohn Co., 780 F.2d 1190, 1195 (5th
Cir. 1986), a case cited by the Court in Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), wherein it is stated: "If the
moving party can show that there is no evidence whatever to
establish one or more essential elements of a claim on which the
opposing party has the burden of proof, trial would be a bootless
exercise, fated for an inevitable result".
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011