Cruz v. Flatlands Christian Ctr., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the summary judgment standard does not require that all ambiguities in the evidence be resolved in favor of the non-moving party
• holding that plaintiffs challenged an evolving series of agency operations rather than a final agency action
• holding that plaintiffs challenged an evolving series of agency operations rather than a final agency action
• holding that under Rule 6(b)(1), “a post-deadline extension ... is permissible only where the failure to meet the deadline was the result of excusable neglect”
• holding that the purpose of Rule 56(e) is “not to replace conclusory allegations of the complaint or answer with conclusory allegations of an affidavit”
• holding that an allegation a plaintiff used land \in the vicinity\ of a challenged action is insufficiently specific to ground standing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).