Hicks v. Napolitano

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a district court may refuse a Rule 56(d) motion if the party opposing summary judgment is \unlikely to garner useful information from supplemental discovery\
• noting that a district court may refuse a Rule 56(d) motion if the party opposing summary judgment is “unlikely to garner useful information from supplemental discovery”
• explaining that “Rule 56(d) allows, in certain circumstances, for supplemental discovery after a motion for summary judgment has been filed” and describing the requirements for obtaining relief under that Rule
• acknowledging that \the subjectivity necessarily introduced by the interview process can mask discrimination\
• affirming denial of Rule 56(d) request because the additional requested discovery is “unlikely to garner useful evidence” that would “alter the summary judgment landscape”
• \Weighing the value of [two interviewees' different types of] experience required the interview panel to make a judgment that it was entitled to make.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).