January 26th I received a summary judgment against me where the judge ignored every law. Not that I haven't made mistakes, but my papers were clear in their intention. On Jan 29, the opposing attorney sent a 5-day rule notice to the court, which I received a copy of on Jan 31. Apparently this rule gives me five business days to state my objections to the summary judgment ruling before its actually signed... To me that means Thurs Feb 7(leaving out the weekend). I've been all over the internet for days trying to figure out how to deal with this. In the courtroom, the judge did everything he could to stop me from voicing my objections, and I was only able to voice a few. Is this the time for me to voice ALL of them? My understanding is that appeals are based on the judge's errors and therefore the objections you have raised that are on the record are extremely important. A friend has told me that these "objections" are different than those made during a hearing, but didn't explain how. How would a paper like this be titled? Is it a motion or what? Something like "Motion to Object Order for Summary Judgment"?It was suggested to me by someone that I file for "findings of fact and conclusions of law." Although I've been all over the place searching, I can find nothing to show what this should say, if it needs a brief and affidavit submitted with it, or any other information. I'm assuming it would be titled something like "Motion to Demand Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law." If this goes to the same judge, who dismissed my motions to compel discovery, isn't he just going to dismiss this too? Should it be going to someone else? Does anyone have an example of this type of Motion?Can I use a "Stay Order" to stop this summary judgment in its tracks before its signed? I haven't been able to find an example of a stay order either. I find lots of cases where a stay order was denied, etc., but no examples of how to do one, nor a clear description of how and when one should be used.Is there anything else that would help in this situation? Also can anyone tell me why the editing buttons are not working? Is this a setting somewhere? For instance, its not adding paragraphs or bold.
I read it far enough that it says you can't appeal until an order for judgment has already been signed. I know I need to read this in the very near future, but at the moment, I'm trying to deal with stopping it or getting in my last bit of info before its actually signed.
Just my view from the cheap seats, but if the judge "ignored every law" it would seem that you would have plenty of objections to cite. As far as the title goes, what's wrong with "Objection to Summary Judgment" wherein you cite all of your objections to the facts presented and the laws ignored? At least you'd have them in the record.
ccBob,I wasn't even sure if this should be a motion or what. Couldn't I make it a motion and demand that they re-evaluate the facts before signing the order?
Or perhaps a motion to re-evaluate with the objections being a separate paper? I don't know if motions made in a lower court, if denied, are looked at in an appeal.
It would be styled "Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment." You're not moving the court to do anything rather, you're opposing their motion.
There might be "Motion to Reconsider". What was the justification for summary judment? What were your defenses?
I think that the motion has been granted. I'm not sure that it isn't signed right then. I think that the oppositon should have been to the summary judgment before the hearing. Without anything for the court to use to resist the summary judgment, you lose.
In another thread, you gave a URL for documents from you case. I was looking at them. The other side seems to have said what you needed to do in their response: Pleadings deal with the law, FACTS are set out in affidavits. Because you didn't file any affidavits, there are no facts on your side. I didn't see their affidvaits but you can bet they filed them. There's CELOTEX CORP. V. CATRETT, 477 U. S. 317 (1986), http://supreme.justia.com/us/477/317/ , to say you don't always need affidavits, but I suspect that works for the defendant trying to kill off a plaintiff with summary judgment more than the other way around.
hmmmmm... I answered after your post #9, and its not here! and now its 3 a.m. and I can't deal with it tonight anymore. I filed affidavits after reading that, along with motions to compel discovery. The judge ignored it all. I read a citation or a statute somewhere that said it couldn't be held against pro se litigants if they didn't do affidavits, but I can't find it again.
Your webpage text says that you provided the affidavit on the day of the hearing, I'm pretty sure that's what I read. What do your court rules say about when they can be filed? I'm not saying that the other side won't file things the day of the hearing, but if you do it, expect that there might be issues. Furthermore, did your affidavit create genuine issues of material fact? What were those issues? Since you seem to be thinking about appealing, you might consider that . You've read WI caselaw on summary judgments?
Maybe . . . I couldn't tell whether this was just a MSJ or something else that is limited to the OP's jurisdiction/court. I'm not familiar with it in the context presented. I am only familiar w/ the typical Motion - Oppposition - Response - Reply scenario. But it does seems that you're right. Moreover, and assuming you're right, then a Motion to Reconsider is the correct procedural manuever if only for the purposes of the record in case of appeal. I thought you were dumb Bob? Seriously, you're welcome here. We need all the dummies we can get.
Summary Judgment help Hello I am a paralegal, I might be able to help, but you must understand THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, with that in mind, consider this. A Summary Judgment is issued when one party to a civil law suite request this action, either the defendant or the plaintiff can ask for Summary Judgment; what it is and how it works is very simple. IF you do not have a defense to the law suite that falls within the current case law, of the type of law suite against you, a summary is granted or affirmed in favor of the plaintiff. The Judge has the legal power to summaries, (hence summary judgment) your defense, and he knows from established case law if you are in the required minimal standards necessary to disprove the charge against you. If you are not the judge will issue the summary judgment, in short you do not have a case. The burden of proof has been meet.In your response to the summons you most likely issued a written response to the â??complaint â??, this would be the foundation for the Judges summary of your defense. If your response does not counter point by point the charges, has it related to the most current case law, there is no chance of winning Your type of law suit has occurred so often the a clear set of legal rules have been decided by past courts, these decisions (caselaw) at some point were appealed to higher Courts and finally to the United States Supreme Court, who are the highest court, therefore a Judge knows that the plaintiff has met the burden, and also knows that your defense, has been attempted and failed in other cases exactly like yours, so he grants summary judgment. Hope this helps.
You're saying that there is so much case law against this type of case, that we're wasting our time trying to fight it?
Sorry to say In a word yes. You have the right to appeal, but the appeal will go to the next highest court, the odds of a judge granting summary judgment knowing that he would be overturned by a higher judge in unheard of. These rulings most of them go back to 1795 at the time America was established, some are orginal British Common Law, in the 1500s. Summery jungments are the hardest to win, the judge would not issue one if there was any chance of being overturned. I do not know the issues of your case, a summery judgment can be request by eather party,it is a case of pure law. With out knowing the exact facts I would assume that the is summery is based on this.
Summary Judgment Defined summary judgment n. a court order ruling that no factual issues remain to be tried and therefore a cause of action or all causes of action in a complaint can be decided upon certain facts without trial. A summary judgment is based upon a motion by one of the parties that contends that all necessary factual issues are settled or so one-sided they need not be tried. The motion is supported by declarations under oath, excerpts from depositions which are under oath, admissions of fact and other discovery, as well as a legal argument (points and authorities), that argue that there are no triable issues of fact and that the settled facts require a summary judgment for the moving party. The opposing party will respond by counter-declarations and legal arguments attempting to show that there are "triable issues of fact." If it is unclear whether there is a triable issue of fact in any cause of action, then summary judgment must be denied as to that cause of action. The theory behind the summary judgment process is to eliminate the need to try settled factual issues and to decide without trial one or more causes of action in the complaint. The pleading procedures are extremely technical and complicated and are particularly dangerous to the party against whom the motion is made. See also: cause of action summary adjudication of issues Place this dictionary on your site
This is from your case WEPCO v. Cal. Union Ins. Co., 142 Wis 2d 676, 664, 419, N.W.2d 255, 259 (Ct. App. 1987). This is caselaw, it is the standered that you must prove you have done. It became the national standered in 1987.
Against what type of case? If you mean general contract law, it is huge. Go look at Corbin on Contracts. There are about a dozen volumes. Or Williston on Contracts, which has something like 45 volumes. But even with all that, there are plenty of things you could wonder about yet not find in any of the volumes, certainly not caselaw references to your specific juristiction. So I wouldn't say that there's no point in trying to help further flesh out the law. Of course trying to do it without a good lawyer seems real hard.
