Wark v. Maine

How courts have described this case

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

• discussing the difference between demonstrating competitive injury under § 13(a) and proving actual injury under § 15(a)
• finding unfair surprise to the non-movant when the district court ruled on claim elements other than those addressed in a summary judgment motion
• considering hearsay at the summary judgment stage because “Petruzzi's IGA simply has to produce the Southern Tier principal to give this testimony”
• “[T]here is no indication that Spagnola's salesforce would be unavailable to testify at trial. [Thus t]he averments of Spagnola's affidavit are capable of proof through admissible evidence.”
• non-movant could rely on inadmissible hearsay in affidavit for purposes of surviving opponent’s motion if the movant fails to show that the declarant could not be produced to testify at trial
• no indication that the declarants who made the statements mentioned in the opposition materials would not be available for trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).