Choisser v. State Ex Rel. Herman

How courts have described this case

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

• “A failure to respond to the motion with a written memorandum or opposing affidavits cannot, by itself, entitle the movant to summary judgment.”
• A court should consider a verified complaint in determining whether fact issues preclude summary judgment.
• loss of customers, business, or profits non-compensable as independent items of damages but only evidence of decrease in property value after taking, citing State ex rel Herman v. Schaffer, 105 Ariz. 478, 467 P.2d 66 (1970)
• “[A]n adverse party who fails to respond [to a motion for summary judgment] does so at his peril because uncontroverted evidence favorable to the movant, and from which only one inference can be drawn, will be presumed to be true.”
• “The admonition in Rule 56(e) means that an adverse party who fails to respond does so at his peril because uncontroverted evidence favorable to the movant, and from which only one inference can be drawn, will be presumed to be true.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).