In this review of the evolving role of summary judgment, Professor Steven Gensler provides insight into whether Rule 56(c) give judges discretion to deny summary judgment even if the preconditions of Rule 56(c) have been met, i.e., if there is no genuine issue of material fact and judgment as a matter of law could be entered, and Professor Edward Brunet engages directly the important debate regarding intemperate use of summary judgment to deny potentially meritorious claims, contending that currently available ―safeguards‖ can prevent inappropriate grant of summary judgment. Professor Stephen Burbank and Professor Linda Mullenix enlarge the discussion to consider as well the impact of summary judgment on other aspects of the interconnected federal procedural system. Professor Burbank explores the increasing doctrinal linking of the Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss and summary judgment and the impact of the Supreme Court‘s decisions in Twombly and Iqbal on the future of rulemaking. Professor Mullenix evaluates the desirability of increasing the tasks assigned to the sturdy summary judgment workhorse, at least in the area of complex litigation, by including in the Federal Rules explicit authorization for courts to consider summary judgment on the named plaintiffs‘ claims before class certification. Finally, Professor Jeffrey Cooper reviews diverging Supreme Court opinions to provide insight on whether, under the Erie doctrine, Federal Rule 56 will continue to control in diversity cases.
Genetin, Bernadette Bollas
"Symposium: The Future of Summary Judgment Foreword - Summary Judgment and the Influence of Federal Rulemaking,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 43
, Article 1.
Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol43/iss4/1