International Shortstop, Inc., and Sam Talkington v. Rally's, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that courts are willing to accept something less than a formal Rule 56(f) request from litigants
• finding that a party requesting Rule 56(f) discovery was not dilatory when the other party had consistently opposed discovery requests on the ground of attorney-client privilege
• noting that “every reasonable inference” must be made in favor of the nonmoving party
• nonmoving party may survive a motion for summary judgment by pointing to contradictions in the moving party's own pleadings and evidence which generate genuine issues of material fact
• “Accordingly, we have emphasized repeatedly that cases which turn on the moving party’s state of mind are not well-suited for summary judgment.”
• describing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f), since amended in 2010 to be codified at Rule 56(d)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).