Smith v. Phillips Pipe Line Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that courts “do not approve in general the piecemeal consideration of successive motions for summary judgment because parties ought to . . . present their strongest case for summary judgment when the matter is first raised.” (quotation marks and alteration removed)
• “The Court considers it more economical to address the remaining issues in this litigation all at once . . . .
• “The Court ‘do[es] not approve in general the piecemeal consideration of successive motions for summary judgment’ . . . .” (first alteration in original) (quoting Allstate Fin. Corp. v. Zimmerman, 296 F.2d 797, 799 (5th Cir. 1961))
• “The Court do[es] not approve in general the piecemeal consideration of successive motions for summary judgment because parties ought to be held to the requirement that they present their strongest case for summary judgment when the matter is first raised.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).