Motions for Summary Judgment act as shortcuts for cases, allowing a party to win a case on paper without having to go to trial. However, if the opposing party knows what they are doing, defeating a Motion for Summary Judgment (“MSJ”) is fairly easy, so long as there is a shred (“scintilla”) of evidence to support each element of a party’s claim and the party answers in a timely manner. In Texas, there are two types of these MSJs, a Traditional MSJ under Rule 166a and a No-Evidence MSJ under Rule 166a(i).
Recently, I was involved in a case with a lawyer who had been practicing law since the 1970’s. Unfortunately for his client, this particular attorney had not stayed on top of his continuing legal education when it came to summary judgment motions. In litigation, and on behalf of my client, after discovery was substantially complete, I filed both types of MSJs: a Traditional and a No-Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment. It turned out that he was unaware that Texas created a unique vehicle, a No-Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment, in the last 20 or so years. So, instead of filing a response to the MSJ pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, this esteemed counsel tried the “spaghetti on the wall” trick, which is a colloquial term when an attorney responds to an MSJ with a lengthy response and/or a pile of exhibits in order for the court to hopefully find something in the stack of paper that sticks and defeats the pending MSJ. In doing so, he completely overlooked specifically responding to the No-Evidence MSJ. While this may have worked against a Traditional MSJ, not knowing the differences between the types of MSJs cost him his case. These motions serve distinct purposes and have specific requirements:
Traditional Motion for Summary Judgment under Texas Rule 166a:
The traditional motion for summary judgment is a well-established procedure used to seek the early resolution of a case in Texas. Here are the essential elements of a traditional motion for summary judgment under Rule 166a:
a. Burden of Proof: The moving party, typically the defendant, bears the burden of proof in a traditional motion for summary judgment. They must show that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The moving party must present evidence, such as affidavits, deposition testimony, or other supporting documents, to support their assertions.
b. Genuine Issues of Material Fact: In Texas, a traditional motion for summary judgment requires the court to determine whether there are genuine issues of material fact that need to be resolved through a trial. If there are disputed facts that may impact the outcome of the case, the motion is typically denied, and the case proceeds to trial.
c. Legal Analysis: The court analyzes the evidence presented by both parties and applies the applicable law to determine whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. If there are no genuine issues of material fact, and the law supports the moving party’s position, the court may grant the motion, resulting in a judgment without a trial.
No-Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment under Texas Rule 166a(I):
The no-evidence motion for summary judgment, specifically provided by Rule 166a(i), is designed to address cases where the non-moving party has failed to produce any evidence on an essential element of their claims. Here are the key aspects of a no-evidence motion for summary judgment under Rule 166a(i):
a. Shifting the Burden: After an adequate time for discovery, in a no-evidence motion for summary judgment, the moving party, typically the defendant, asserts that there is no evidence to support an essential element of the non-moving party’s claim. This shifts the burden to the non-moving party, who must then present evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact.
b. No-Evidence Standard: Under Rule 166a(i), the court evaluates whether the non-moving party has failed to produce any evidence that would enable a reasonable jury to find in their favor on an essential element of their claim. If the non-moving party cannot provide any evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact, the court may grant the no-evidence motion for summary judgment.
c. Limited Discovery: Rule 166a(i) allows for the filing of a no-evidence motion for summary judgment early in the litigation process, often limiting the opportunity for extensive discovery. This promotes the efficient resolution of cases that lack factual support.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provide two distinct motions for summary judgment: the traditional motion under Rule 166a and the no-evidence motion under Rule 166a(i). While the traditional motion focuses on the absence of genuine issues of material fact, the no-evidence motion can only be filed after an adequate time for discovery and challenges the non-moving party to provide evidence supporting their claims. Familiarity with these rules is essential for attorneys practicing in Texas to effectively advocate for their clients and navigate the state’s civil litigation process. The Woodlands Law Firm is extremely familiar with these types of Motions and the required responses. Should you need assistance, please contact the firm today!
Leave a Reply