Skip to main content

Williams v. United Corp.

Citations

  • 50 V.I. 191
  • 2008 WL 2714211
  • 2008 V.I. Supreme LEXIS 9

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that the evidence presented can be direct or circumstantial but showing the mere possibility that something occurred in a particular way is not sufficient
  • stating that the Court may only take a nonmovant’s allegations as true if they are supported by the record
  • applying standards currently set forth in Fed. R. Civ. R 56(a) and (c)
  • in the absence of actual notice, evidence that the owner “should have discovered the danger and taken steps to remedy it” can establish constructive notice
  • evidence allowed an inference that “the substance had been on the floor long enough that Plaza should have discovered it”
  • “It is a basic principle ... that trial judges should not weigh the evidence, make credibility determinations, or draw ‘legitimate inferences’ from the facts when ruling upon summary judgment motions because these are the functions of the jury.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hodge

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

65 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced 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.