Milissa Garside v. Osco Drug, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that at the summary judgment stage the evidence must be examined in the light most favorable to the nonmovant
• holding that at the summary judgment stage the evidence must be examined in the light most favorable to the nonmovant
• holding that “absent a showing of admissibility” an appellant could not rely on a third party’s description of an expert’s anticipated testimony to oppose summary judgment
• explaining that “in appraising summary judgments ... a court of appeals is not wedded to the district court’s reasoning”
• explaining that an appellate court is free to affirm a judgment on any independently sufficient ground made manifest by the record
• explaining that summary judgment should be granted unless the non-movant demonstrates, by competent evidence, a genuine issue of material fact

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).