Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Federal Insurance Co. of New York

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[a] motion for summary judgment should be granted only when it is clear that there is no genuine issue of fact to be tried and inquiry concerning the facts is not desirable to clarify the application of the law” (emphasis added)
• entitlement to summary judgment must be established with such clarity as to leave no room for controversy
• \[I]n cases within [this Court's] appellate jurisdiction it will not consider or decide nonjurisdictional questions which have not been determined by the trial court.\
• rule approved in syllabus point 8, but facts and failure to cross-assign error did not directly support the proposition advanced: an order denying a summary judgment motion is interlocutory.
• even when trial judge is of opinion he should direct a verdict, he should hear evidence at trial and then direct rather than try case in advance on a summary judgment motion
• “In a class action brought under Rule 23(b)(3), the commonality requirement of Rule 23(a)(2) is subsumed under, or superseded by, the more stringent Rule 23(b)(3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).