Federal Summary Judgment Standard of Review Insurance Exclusion
Legal Alerts
Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Befitting Florida'south Dominion one.510 to Federal Dominion 56
Miami, Fla. (April 29, 2021) - Effective May i, 2021, the Florida courts will transition to a new summary judgment standard meant to "align Florida's summary judgment standard with that of the federal courts and of the supermajority of states that have already adopted the federal summary judgment standard." In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Pro. 1.510, 309 So. 3d 192, 192 (Fla. 2020). Consistent with this amendment, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 has been amended to adopt the federal summary judgment rule, with exceptions for timing-related bug. The Florida Supreme Court's most contempo stance on dominion i.510 and the text of new rule 1.510 can be found hither.
As background, on December 31, 2020, the Florida Supreme Courtroom adopted the federal summary judgment standard by amending Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c) to include the post-obit sentence: "The summary judgment standard provided for in this dominion shall be construed and applied in accord with the federal summary judgment standard articulated in Celotex Corp. five. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986); Anderson five. Liberty Entrance hall, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1976); and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) [(the 'Celotex trilogy')]." In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Pro. ane.510, 309 So. 3d at 196. The courtroom's amendment was slated to have result on May i, 2021, bailiwick to a public annotate menstruum. The court too sought guidance from the Florida Bar's Civil Procedure Rules Committee. After careful consideration of numerous responses, the court ultimately chose to prefer the substance of the text from federal rule 56. Along with its amendments, the court provides substantial guidance equally to how the Florida courts and practitioners should interpret the new dominion. A summary of the court'southward thorough discussion follows.
Adherence to the Federal Summary Judgment Standard: The new summary judgment standard is to be interpreted consistent with the unabridged body of instance law interpreting federal rule 56—not just the law every bit applied in the Celotex trilogy. The courtroom best-selling the import of the federal Celotex trilogy of cases, which forms the foundation for the federal standard, simply removed reference to Celotex in the trunk of amended rule 1.510. The court explained that "the new rule must be guided not only by the Celotex trilogy, but by the overall trunk of case law interpreting federal rule 56."
The Movant'due south Burden of Production: The brunt of production refers to the quantum of evidence required in social club to either negate an essential element of the nonmovant'south merits, or establish that the nonmoving party cannot carry its ultimate brunt of persuasion at trial. Encounter Nissan Burn & Marine Ins. Co. v. Fritz Cos., 210 F.3d 1099 (ninth Cir. 2000). The court observed that the movant's burden of production is not "onerous" and can exist "regularly discharged with ease." Despite this, the court admonished that the nonmovant should all the same be afforded "adequate fourth dimension for discovery."
Defensive Summary Judgment Motions Authorized: The court specifically recognized that amended rule 1.510 permits a moving party to obtain summary judgment without disproving the nonmoving political party'south case. Specifically, "If the nonmoving party must show Ten to prevail [at trial], the moving party at summary judgment can either produce evidence that X is not so or betoken out that the nonmoving party lacks the show to show X." Bedford five. Doe, 880 F.3d 993, 996-97 (8th Cir. 2018). "A movant for summary judgment need non set along evidence when the nonmovant bears the burden of persuasion at trial." Wease five. Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C., 915 F.3d 987, 997 (5th Cir. 2019).
The Trial Court's Reasons for Granting or Denying Summary Judgment: Dominion 1.510 provides that a trial court shall state on the record its reasons for granting or denying summary judgment. The court classified this as a "critical requirement," and explained that, in order to comply, a trial court must do more than "make a conclusory statement that there is or is not a genuine dispute as to material fact. The court must state the reasons for its decision with enough specificity to provide useful guidance to the parties and, if necessary, to allow for appellate review."
Time for Filing and Responding to Summary Judgment Motions: Amended dominion one.510 at present provides that a motion for summary judgment must exist filed at least 40 days earlier the time stock-still for a hearing. The amended dominion also provides that the nonmovant'south response—with supporting factual position—exist filed at to the lowest degree 20 days before the hearing.
Application of the Amended Rule To Pending Cases: Amended rule 1.510 takes effect on May i, 2021. The court clarified that it applies to pending cases as follows:
- where summary judgment has already been denied under the pre-amendment rule: "the court should give the parties a reasonable opportunity to file a renewed summary judgment motility under the new rule. See Wilsonart, LLC v. Lopez, 308 Then. 3d 961, 964 (Fla. 2020)."
- where a pending summary judgment movement is briefed, merely has not been heard: "the court should allow the parties a reasonable opportunity to amend their filings to comply with the new rule."
- where a motion for rehearing is pending pursuant to a motion decided under the pre-amendment rule: the motion "should be decided under the pre-amendment rule, subject of course to a party's power to file a renewed motion for summary judgment under the new rule."
Despite what appears to exist clear-cut guidance from the Florida Supreme Court, it remains to be seen how lower Florida courts will interpret this new standard. Nosotros are cautiously optimistic that this new standard volition do good our clients by making it easier to obtain summary judgment when there is no genuine bear witness upon which a nonmovant can rely in order to comport its burden of persuasion at trial. Importantly, the new standard displaces the "scintilla of evidence" standard that previously governed in Florida state court.
For more than information relating to Florida's new summary judgment standard, please contact any of the members of Lewis Brisbois' Florida Appellate Practice Group. Visit our Appellate Practice page to learn more about our appellate capabilities.
Florida Appellate Practise Grouping
David Luck, Partner
Kathryn Ender, Partner
Jenna Fischman, Partner
Keoki Businesswoman, Associate
Brian Goldenberg, Acquaintance
Related Practices
- Appellate
- National Trial Practice
Related Attorneys
-
Partners
-
-
-
-
Associates
-
Notice an Attorney
Each of the firm'south offices include partners, associates and a professional staff defended to meeting the challenge of providing the firm'due south clients with boggling service.
Source: https://lewisbrisbois.com/newsroom/legal-alerts/florida-supreme-court-adopts-federal-summary-judgment-standard