Little v. Liquid Air Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a nonmoving party cannot satisfy his summary judgment burden with only conclusional allegations, unsubstantiated assertions, or a mere scintilla of evidence
• holding that a party cannot defeat summary judgment with conclusory allegations, unsubstantiated assertions, or \only a scintilla of evidence.\
• recognizing that movant need not negate the elements of the nonmovant’s case to prevail on a motion for summary judgment
• holding that “We do not…in the absence of any proof, assume that the nonmoving party could or would prove the necessary facts.”
• holding that plaintiff’s summary judgment burden is not satisfied by unsubstantiated assertions and can only be met with actual evidence of contradictory facts
• holding that even at the summary judgment stage, the court will not “in the absence of any proof, assume that the nonmoving party could or would prove the necessary facts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Little v. Liquid Air Corp.

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Little v. Liquid Air Corp.
  Fifth Circuit· 1992-01-15· cited 199×
• Little v. Liquid Air Corp.
  Fifth Circuit· 1991-09-03· cited 15×
• Little v. Liquid Air Corp.
  Fifth Circuit· 1994-10-26· cited 4×