Aboutwhy sjkplawyerspracticesInsightsCase StudyNewsLocations
Civil Litigation

Summary Judgment Standard

The question on summary judgment is not who has the more convincing story. It is whether a reasonable factfinder could see the material facts more than one way.

Reviewed

01 GUIDE

Summary Judgment Standard: what usually happens

Finding issues, not resolving them

New York courts often describe their role on these motions as issue finding rather than issue determination. The judge does not weigh credibility or decide which witness to believe; if the evidence supports competing versions of a material fact, the case generally goes to trial. Federal courts frame the test in similar terms, asking whether there is a genuine dispute as to any material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. A fact is material when it could change the outcome under the law governing the claim. Disagreements over facts that do not matter to the legal question do not defeat the motion.

How the burden moves

The party seeking summary judgment goes first and must show, through evidence, that it is entitled to judgment. In New York state court, if that initial showing is not made, the motion should be denied regardless of how weak the opposing papers are. Once the showing is made, the burden shifts to the other side to produce admissible evidence that raises a triable issue. Federal practice allocates this somewhat differently, particularly when the opposing party would carry the burden of proof at trial, where the movant may be able to point to an absence of evidence. Throughout, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, with reasonable inferences drawn in its favor.

Applying the standard to your record

Because the standard is applied claim by claim, we map what the law requires for each claim against what the record actually contains. Speculation, conclusions without supporting facts, and inadmissible hearsay usually do not create a genuine dispute on their own. A sworn statement that conflicts with documents or earlier testimony may be discounted, and a well-supported account may carry the motion even if the other side simply disagrees with it. We look for the points where the case truly turns and test whether the evidence on each side would hold up at trial. That review tells you whether a motion is worth bringing, or what an opposition needs to include.

02 ATTORNEYS

Who you would be working with

Attorneys at our New York and Washington, D.C. offices handle matters like this one.

03 HOW WE WORK

Client-centered service across jurisdictions

Global Coordination & Expertise

We deliver coordinated and effective legal services to our clients, utilizing our extensive legal resources and experienced attorneys in our well-integrated global network. Through our Washington D.C. and New York offices, together with our alliance

Multilingual & Cross-Border Communication

Our attorneys are experienced in both domestic and international matters and, with fluency in various languages, provide clear and consistent communication at every stage of your legal process.

Client-Centered Approach

Client service lies at the heart of our operations. From the initial consultation, we prioritize understanding your situation, listening to your goals, and providing regular updates and strategies tailored to your individual case.

Multidisciplinary & Efficient Solutions

Our multidisciplinary approach and established processes enable us to address cross-border challenges with efficiency.

04 OFFICES

Where we meet clients

Consultations are available in person or remotely.

New York

285 Fulton Street, New York, NY 10007
(855) 529-7557

Washington, D.C.

Suite 985, 1717 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006
(855) 529-7557

Los Angeles

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 820, Los Angeles, CA 90067
(424) 561-7557

Attorney Advertising. This page is general information about summary judgment standard and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Outcomes depend on the facts of each matter, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Laws differ by state and change over time.