Robin Orr v. Bank of America, Nt & Sa

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court erred, because the statements at issue were hearsay and not admissible under Rule 801(d)(1)(B
• holding that an extract from a deposition that lacks the reporter’s certification is inadmissible at summary judgment
• holding that a trial court can consider only admissible evidence in ruling on a 23 motion for summary judgment
• holding that various depositions and other documents were properly excluded from consideration on motion for summary judgment because documents were not authenticated
• holding that an extract from a deposition that lacks the reporter’s certification is inadmissible at summary judgment
• holding that a “trial court 6 can only consider admissible evidence in ruling on a motion for summary judgment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).