Provident Life & Accident Insurance v. Goel

How courts have described this case

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

• denying relief based on handwriting analysis when movant “had access to the copy of the signed [document] long before summary judgment was entered . . . and the importance of the [document] . . . was evident from the beginning.”
• statements made on belief or “on information and belief” cannot be used on a summary judgment motion
• statements made “on information and belief” do not satisfy the personal-knowledge requirement and “cannot be utilized on a summary judgment motion” (internal citation and quotation marks omitted)
• “Unsworn expert reports... do not qualify as affidavits or otherwise admissible evidence for [the] purpose of Rule 56, and may be disregarded by the court when ruling on a motion for summary judgment.”
• “[T]he weighing of the evidence . . . [is a] jury function[], not [that] of a judge. . . . The evidence of the non-movant is to be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor.”
• “Unsworn expert reports . . . do not qualify as affidavits or otherwise admissible evidence for [the] purpose of [summary judgment], and may be disregarded by the court when ruling on a motion for summary judgment.” (first alteration and omission in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).