Say What You Mean and Mean What You Say: Party’s Self-Serving Statements Not Enough to Overcome Summary Disposition

Seifuddin v Esurance Prop. and Cas. Ins. Co., unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued June 20, 2019 (Docket No. 340564), emphasizes the importance of parties remaining aware of specific issues that are raised in dispositive motions because, even if that motion is only granted in part, those same issues may be litigated further if the dispositive motion is renewed following the initial hearing.

A party will be considered to have proper notice under the due process clause if their claims are dismissed after a dispositive motion hearing as long as the issues decided were addressed in the previous dispositive motion.

When a party has already given contradictory testimony under oath as to key issues in their lawsuit, a party’s self-serving statement in an affidavit, on its own, is not sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact in order to survive summary disposition.

To access the full article: http://bit.ly/32irwxU