Morales v. A.C. Orssleff's EFTF

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that plaintiff’s “general reference to [deposition] testimony without pinpointing where in th[e] 89-page deposition support for that reference could be found . . . is precisely the situation that Local Rule 311.12 [which is similar to L.R. 7.1(b
• affirming this District Court’s grant of summary judgment where the Court refused to consider facts which were not presented in compliance with the precursor to the current anti-ferreting rule
• affirming this District Court’s grant of summary judgment where the Court refused to consider facts which were not presented in compliance with the precursor to the current anti-ferreting rule
• disparities between affidavits filed in opposition to summary judgment and prior deposition testimony do not create genuine issues of fact
• “[I]n his submissions to the district court, plaintiff made only a general reference to [a witness’s] testimony without pinpointing where in that 89-page deposition support for that reference could be found. This is precisely the situation that Local Rule 311.12 seeks to avoid.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).