Ellis v. J.R.'s Country Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that inadmissible hearsay statements cannot defeat summary judgment and that “conclusory and self-serving affidavits” carry no weight (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that “persuasive authority from our sister circuits suggests that if [lead plaintiff] had no viable FLSA claim, she was not an appropriate representative in any event for a hypothetical class of similarly situated employees”
• finding it “implausible that subsection (a)’s requirement of a practice of such deductions contemplates isolated conduct”
• making clear that “Rule 56(d) motions [should] be robust,” and observing that a supporting affidavit’s “lack of specificity” counsels against granting relief under Rule 56(d)
• making clear that “Rule 56(d) motions [should] be robust,” and observing that a supporting affidavit’s “lack of specificity” counsels against granting relief under Rule 56(d)
• stating an affidavit submitted in connection with a motion for summary judgment “must be based on personal knowledge and must set forth facts that would be admissible in evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).