Most appeals, particularly those involving evidence, afford the appellate court a very circumscribed role. A court of appeal decides issues of law de novo but reviews findings of fact and discretionary decisions deferentially.

Summary judgment appeals are different. These generally give the appellate court the chance to walk in the trial judge’s shoes, applying the same standards. As the Court of Appeal put it in Ranchwood Communities v. Jim Beat Construction, “[i]n practical effect, we assume the role of a trial court and redetermine the merits of the motion.” Nevertheless, that walk can sometimes stray into hazardous territory for the appellant.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]