Ladd v. Chemonics International, 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, if the party opposing summary judgment does not properly controvert a factual assertion by the movant, the Court should treat the movant’s “factual assertions [that] are properly supported by the record . . . as admitted”
• noting that, if the party opposing summary judgment does not properly controvert a factual assertion by the movant, the Court should treat the movant’s “factual assertions [that] are properly supported by the record . . . as admitted”
• noting that, if the party opposing summary judgment does not properly controvert a factual assertion by the movant, the Court should treat the movant’s “factual assertions [that] are properly supported by the record . . . as admitted”
• noting that, even if the party opposing summary judgment does not properly controvert a factual assertion by the movant, the Court need not treat the fact as admitted where the court’s independent review shows that the fact is not properly supported
• applying D.C. law where defendant’s principal place of business was in D.C. and the employment agreement specified that D.C. law would apply

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).