PROBATE CORNER
DAVID M . GARTEN
Effective May 1 , 2021 , Florida adopts the federal summary judgment standard . See In re Amendments to Fla . Rule of Civ . Procedure
1.510 , 309 So . 3d 192 ( Fla . 2020 ). The purpose of this article is to clarify three aspects of the federal summary judgment standard : ( 1 ) burden of proof , ( 2 ) the directed verdict standard , and ( 3 ) material evidence standard .
Burden of Proof : The party moving for summary judgment bears the initial responsibility of informing the court of the basis for his motion , and identifying those portions of the pleadings , depositions , answers to interrogatories , and admissions on file , together with the affidavits , if any , which he believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact . It is not necessary for the moving party to conclusively disprove the nonmovant ' s theory of the case in order to eliminate any issue of fact . See Celotex Corp . v . Catrett , 477 U . S . 317 ( 1986 ). ●If the moving party does not have the burden of proof at trial , he may show that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party ' s case . Alternatively , the moving party may support the motion for summary judgment with affirmative evidence demonstrating that the nonmoving party will be unable to prove its case at trial . If the moving party shows the absence of a triable issue of fact by either method , the burden on summary judgment shifts to the nonmoving party , who must show that a genuine issue remains for trial . If the nonmoving party fails to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of her case with respect to which she has the burden of proof , the moving party is entitled to summary judgment . ●When the moving party has the burden of proof at trial , he must show affirmatively the absence of a genuine issue of material fact : it must support its motion with credible evidence that would entitle it to a directed verdict if not controverted at trial . In other words , the moving party must show that , on all the essential elements of its case on which it bears the burden of proof at trial , no reasonable jury could find for the non-moving party . See Univalor Trust , SA v . Columbia Petroleum LLC , 2017 U . S . Dist . LEXIS 80244 ; 2017 WL 2306491 ( S . D . Ala . 5 / 25 / 17 ), citing Clark v . Coats & Clark , Inc ., 929 F . 2d 604 ( 11th Cir . 1991 ); United States v .
Summary Judgments ( 2021 ) – Directed Verdict Standard Of Review
Four Parcels of Real Property , 941 F . 2d 1428 ( 11th Cir . 1991 ); Goolsby v . Gain Technologies , Inc ., 362 Fed . Appx . 123 ; 2010 U . S . App . LEXIS 1380 ( 11th Cir . 2010 ).
Directed Verdict Standard : The federal summary judgment standard mirrors the standard for a directed verdict . See Anderson v . Liberty Lobby , Inc ., 477 U . S . 242 , 106 S . Ct . 2505 , 91 L . Ed . 2d 202 ( 1986 ). Although it recognized that there are procedural differences in the two motions ( one is made before trial and the other during trial ), the Supreme Court concluded that “ the inquiry under each is the same : whether the evidence presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to a jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law .” Id . Or stated differently , if no reasonable jury could return a verdict in favor of the nonmoving party , there is no genuine issue of material fact and summary judgment will be granted ." See Beal v . Paramount Pictures Corp ., 20 F . 3d 454 ( 11th Cir . 1994 ); see also Scott v . Harris , 550 U . S . 372 , 127 S . Ct . 1769 , 167 L . Ed . 2d 686 ( 2007 ) (" When opposing parties tell two different stories , one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record , so that no reasonable jury could believe it , a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment .").
Material Evidence Standard : The mere existence of a factual dispute will not automatically necessitate denial of a motion for summary judgment ; rather , only factual disputes that are material preclude entry of summary judgment . See Lofton v . Secretary of Dept . of Children and Family Services , 358 F . 3d 804 ( 11th Cir . 2004 ). An issue of fact is material if it is a legal element of the claim under the applicable substantive law which might affect the outcome of the case . It is genuine if the record taken as a whole could lead a rational trier of fact to find for the nonmoving party . See Reeves v . C . H . Robinson Worldwide , Inc ., 594 F . 3d 798 ( 11th Cir . 2010 ). To survive the movant ' s properly supported motion for summary judgment , a party is required to produce ‘ sufficient favorable evidence ’ that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party . See Anderson , supra . If the evidence
on which the nonmoving party relies is merely colorable or is not significantly probative , summary judgment may be granted . Id . at 249-250 . A mere ' scintilla ' of evidence supporting the opposing party ' s position will not suffice ; there must be enough of a showing that the trier of fact could reasonably find for that party . See Walker v . Darby , 911 F . 2d 1573 ( 11th Cir . 1990 ) quoting Anderson . Conclusory allegations based on subjective beliefs are likewise insufficient to create a genuine dispute of material fact and , therefore , do not suffice to oppose a motion for summary judgment . See Waddell v . Valley Forge Dental Assocs ., Inc ., 276 F . 3d 1275 ( 11th Cir . 2001 ). See also Mobile Attic , Inc . v . Cash , 2012 U . S . Dist . LEXIS 81189 ; 2012 WL 2149889 ( M . D . Ala . 5 / 21 / 12 )
( Continued on next page )
The Palm Beach County Bar Association ' s Appellate Practice Committee presents
A Quarterly Review of Recently Issued Appellate Opinions
Pick up trial tips and strategies !
Friday , May 7th , 2021 12:00 P . M . - 1:00 P . M . Live via Zoom Members : $ 10 .. 00 Non-Members : $ 20.00
Register by visiting www . palmbeachbar . org
PBCBA BAR BULLETIN 24