Summary Judgment: H.B. 589 (2013)
Provides that summary judgment on a particular issue may be
Provides that summary judgment on a particular issue may be rendered in favor of one or more parties even if the granting of the summary judgment does not dispose of the case as to that party or parties. Also provides that the court may only render a decision as to those issues raised in the motion under consideration. Changes present law to allow the court to consider evidence submitted for the purposes of summary judgment and provides that a party can object to evidence submitted through a memorandum in support or opposition or in a motion to strike that provides the specific grounds for the objection. Finally, provides that a party may retain the right to a trial by jury even if the petitioner has stipulated that the cause of action does not exceed $50,000 when the party is entitled to trial by jury has complied with the procedural requirements for asserting that right if the stipulation has occurred less than 60 days prior to trial.
ATRA praises the passage of HB 6030 in Michigan, enacting COVID-19 liability protections.
ATRA’s statement on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania’s ruling in Hammons v. Ethicon to allow an out-of-state lawsuit to continue, openly defying SCOTUS precedent.
ATRA files amicus brief in support of Johnson & Johnson’s decision to appeal a 2019 $465 million judgment against the company, warning against the state attorney general’s expansive use of public nuisance law.
ATRA President Tiger Joyce spoke with Juliette Farley of the Southern California Record about Lawsuit Abuse Awareness Week and business interruption lawsuits.