Jerome D. Jackson v. Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner

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 Circuit reviews a trial court’s' determination of motion to strike for abuse of discretion
• holding that a nonmoving party must “point[ ] to ‘affirmative evidence’ showing disputed material facts” to survive a summary-judgment motion (quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 256–57)
• holding that, where a responding party does not file a statement of material facts in dispute, “the district court is to deem as admitted the moving party’s facts”
• holding that the district court was “fully justified” in treating the moving party’s statement of material facts as admitted where the non-moving party did not provide citations disputing the moving party’s “lengthy statement of undisputed facts”
• holding that the “district court properly deemed as admitted the material facts set forth in the [defendant’s] . . . statement of material facts not in dispute” when the plaintiff did not comply with procedural rules
• holding that the “district court properly deemed as admitted the material facts set forth in the [defendant’s] . . . statement of material facts not in dispute” when the plaintiff did not comply with procedural rules

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).