· 7/11/2011
Ridinger v. Dow Jones & Co. Inc.
Citations
- 651 F.3d 309
- 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14146
- 94 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,212
- 112 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1221
- 2011 WL 2675921
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that to overcome a motion for summary judgment, a non-movant may not rely on “conclusory statements, conjecture, and inadmissible evidence”
- stating that to overcome a motion for summary judgment, a plaintiff may not rely on “conclusory statements, conjecture, and inadmissible evidence.”
- stating that to overcome a motion for summary judgment, a non- movant may not rely on “conclusory statements, conjecture, and inadmissible evidence”
- converting a motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment because of the moving parties’ reliance on a separation agreement, which was outside the scope of the complaint
- “[I]nadmissible evidence [is] insufficient to defeat summary judgment.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Kearse, McLaughlin, Livingston
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.