Discovery is complete. The defendant files a motion for summary judgment, arguing the case should be dismissed without trial because you can’t prove your claims.
Summary judgment motions are the most important pretrial battleground in personal injury litigation. Winning keeps your case alive. Losing ends it.
What Summary Judgment Does
Summary judgment allows courts to decide cases without trial when no genuine dispute of material fact exists. If the evidence, viewed most favorably to the non-moving party, doesn’t support a claim, trial is unnecessary.
The standard comes from O.C.G.A. Section 9-11-56. The moving party must show there’s no genuine issue of material fact and that they’re entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Summary judgment serves efficiency. It prevents trials on claims that lack evidentiary support. But it also threatens plaintiffs who may be denied their day in court.
When Defendants Seek Summary Judgment
Defense summary judgment motions typically argue no evidence of defendant negligence, no evidence of causation, plaintiff fault exceeds 50 percent as a matter of law, or legal doctrines bar the claim.
Timing matters. Most summary judgment motions are filed after discovery closes, when defendants know what evidence exists. Earlier motions are permitted but rarer.
Courts must give the non-moving party adequate discovery opportunity before granting summary judgment. Premature motions can be denied on this basis.
The Evidence Standard
Summary judgment requires examining the evidence, not just the pleadings. The court looks at depositions, documents, and affidavits to determine whether a trial is necessary.
The court doesn’t weigh evidence or judge credibility. Those are jury functions. The court only asks whether reasonable jurors could differ on the evidence presented.
All reasonable inferences favor the non-moving party. If the evidence permits competing inferences, summary judgment is improper.
Plaintiff’s Response Strategy
When facing a defense summary judgment motion, your response must demonstrate genuine factual disputes.
Rely on admissible evidence. Affidavits must be from witnesses with personal knowledge. Documents must be properly authenticated. Speculation and conjecture don’t create triable issues.
Address each defense argument specifically. If the defendant claims no evidence of negligence, point to specific evidence showing negligence. Generalized responses are ineffective.
Expert testimony often matters. In cases requiring expert proof of causation or standard of care, your expert’s opinions must be in the record, typically through deposition testimony or affidavit.
Common Defense Arguments
The “no evidence of causation” argument appears frequently in soft tissue cases. Defendants argue the plaintiff can’t prove the accident caused claimed injuries.
The “eggshell plaintiff” response notes that defendants take plaintiffs as they find them. Pre-existing conditions aggravated by the accident remain compensable.
The “no breach of duty” argument claims the defendant did nothing wrong. Response requires pointing to specific evidence of negligent conduct.
The “plaintiff fault” argument claims the plaintiff was 50 percent or more at fault, barring recovery under Georgia’s comparative negligence rule. Response requires evidence that reasonable jurors could find plaintiff fault below 50 percent.
Partial Summary Judgment
Courts can grant summary judgment on some claims while allowing others to proceed.
A defendant might win summary judgment on punitive damages while the compensatory damage claim survives. Or summary judgment might be granted on liability while damages remain disputed.
Partial summary judgment narrows the issues for trial. It can be strategically valuable for both sides.
The Sham Affidavit Doctrine
Plaintiffs sometimes submit affidavits contradicting their prior deposition testimony. Georgia courts apply the sham affidavit doctrine to such submissions.
If an affidavit directly contradicts clear deposition testimony without explanation, courts may disregard it. The doctrine prevents parties from manufacturing factual disputes through contradictory statements.
However, the doctrine has limits. Affidavits that clarify, explain, or supplement prior testimony are different from those that directly contradict it.
Standards of Review
Trial courts have discretion in summary judgment rulings, but appellate courts review de novo. The appellate court examines the evidence fresh and determines whether summary judgment was proper.
This de novo review means summary judgment denials and grants receive the same level of appellate scrutiny.
When Plaintiffs Seek Summary Judgment
Plaintiffs can also move for summary judgment, typically on liability issues.
If the defendant ran a red light captured on camera and admits the light was red, the plaintiff might seek summary judgment on liability. This leaves only damages for trial.
Plaintiff summary judgment motions are less common because defendants usually raise at least some factual dispute about fault.
Strategic Considerations
Summary judgment motions are expensive. Briefing requires significant attorney time. The decision to file, or how vigorously to oppose, involves cost-benefit analysis.
For defendants, summary judgment offers a chance to end the case without trial. Even when chances of success are modest, the attempt may be worthwhile.
For plaintiffs, thorough opposition is critical. Losing summary judgment ends your case. Survival means you get to present your case to a jury.
Depositions and Summary Judgment
Deposition testimony locked in during discovery becomes the primary evidence on summary judgment. What you said in your deposition matters enormously.
This is why deposition preparation is critical. Careless answers create summary judgment ammunition. Thoughtful, accurate testimony supports your case.
Document Your Evidence
When discovery concludes, inventory your evidence. Can you prove each element of your claims? Are there gaps that might support summary judgment?
If gaps exist, consider whether additional discovery can fill them. Supplemental depositions, expert disclosures, or document requests might be necessary.
Oral Argument
Georgia courts generally allow oral argument on summary judgment motions. This gives both sides opportunity to address the court directly.
Argument focuses on applying the legal standard to the evidence. Does a genuine dispute exist? What reasonable inferences does the evidence support?
Judges often reveal their concerns during argument. Addressing those concerns effectively can influence the outcome.
Summary judgment is the moment of truth in many personal injury cases. Understanding the standard and responding effectively can mean the difference between getting to trial and going home empty-handed.
Summary judgment involves technical legal standards and detailed evidentiary analysis. This article provides general information about summary judgment in Georgia personal injury cases. For specific guidance about summary judgment strategy in your case, consult with your Georgia personal injury attorney.