4 ms·

For non lawyers: a request for summary judgment is something any lawyer will do, possibly multiple times in a case. And the vast majority of the time, they’re d

For non lawyers: a request for summary judgment is something any lawyer will do, possibly multiple times in a case. And the vast majority of the time, they’re denied. It does not mean that their case is a slam dunk or anything; just that they want the judge to prematurely end the matter in their favor. It’s almost a useless motion, but because it has worked sometimes, your lawyer would be stupid to not try it. In other words, an article saying that a party requested summary judgment doesn’t really mean anything. I’m almost certain the other party filed one as well.

sp332 4y ago
They did, and it's to prevent the Archive from lending out digital copies at all. https://www.eff.org/document/hachette-v-internet-archive-hachettes-memorandum-suimmary-judgment https://www.eff.org/document/hachette-v-internet-archive-hac...
SnowHill9902 4y ago
It’s said that it avoids objections of inadequate counseling at a higher court. How true is that?
- tiahura 4y ago
  That doesn’t sound “American”legal. In the US, summary judgment is a procedure used in civil cases, typically one party seeking money from the other. Ineffective assistance of counsel is a criminal concept.
- rhino369 4y ago
  Not for civil cases. To win on summary judgment, there essentially has to be no genuine dispute of facts. So you often do not bother filing for summary judgment. It's more appropriate when the dispute can be decided on purely legal grounds that don't need a juries input.
  - kelnos 4y ago
    Ah, so basically the Internet Archive is asking the judge, "hypothetically, assuming we did everything they are accusing us of, we assert that the law would still be on our side, yeah?" Whereas if the Internet Archive suspected what they were being accused of wasn't legal, summary judgement wouldn't be appropriate, and they might want to go to trial to try to prove their case that they aren't actually doing what they're being accused of?
    - rhino369 4y ago
      It's not quite so far as "assuming," but pretty much. There is no point in a summary judgement in a "he said she said" or when there is conflicting evidence.
wahern 4y ago
According to a 2006 study of Federal district courts, > Summary judgment motions are filed in fewer cases than the bench and bar might expect. They are filed in approximately 13.7% of cases, with this proportion varying between 9.7% and 22% depending on the district. Thus, summary judgment motions are not filed in every case in the federal courts, as it sometimes seems to judges and lawyers [1] https://iaals.du.edu/sites/default/files/documents/publications/efficiency_in_motion_summary_judgment.pdf https://iaals.du.edu/sites/default/files/documents/publicati... EDIT: Correction, study published in 2018 of cases closed in 2015. Not sure where 2006 came from....
- urthor 4y ago
  So many cases in the legal profession are settled out of court almost immediately, I wouldn't take many statistics like this at face value. Once you filter out the majority of legal cases that accrue, say, less than a thousand total billable hours, I imagine filing summary judgements in these "serious" cases is quite common.
gmiller123456 4y ago
In this particular instance though, a the summary judgement ruling is pretty much going to be what the whole case is about. A trial would be to determine the facts of the case, like "Did archive.org distribute copies of books?", and there's really no question about that. A summary judgement asks the question "Assume we did what the plaintiff says we did, do we have a right to do that anyway?". And that's really the only question this case will answer.
- WesternWind 4y ago
  That's not entirely true I don't think? A jury trial determines facts, but a bench trial can still occur.The difference between a bench trail is things like discovery, which can be enormously expensive.
mrandish 4y ago
A summary judgement can also be strategically useful as it tends to force the other party to spell out their legal arguments in detail earlier in the case. Even if the SJ is denied it can be beneficial in targeting discovery requests.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

sp332 4y ago

They did, and it's to prevent the Archive from lending out digital copies at all. https://www.eff.org/document/hachette-v-internet-archive-hachettes-memorandum-suimmary-judgment https://www.eff.org/document/hachette-v-internet-archive-hac...

SnowHill9902 4y ago

It’s said that it avoids objections of inadequate counseling at a higher court. How true is that?

tiahura 4y ago
That doesn’t sound “American”legal. In the US, summary judgment is a procedure used in civil cases, typically one party seeking money from the other. Ineffective assistance of counsel is a criminal concept.
rhino369 4y ago
Not for civil cases. To win on summary judgment, there essentially has to be no genuine dispute of facts. So you often do not bother filing for summary judgment. It's more appropriate when the dispute can be decided on purely legal grounds that don't need a juries input.
- kelnos 4y ago
  Ah, so basically the Internet Archive is asking the judge, "hypothetically, assuming we did everything they are accusing us of, we assert that the law would still be on our side, yeah?" Whereas if the Internet Archive suspected what they were being accused of wasn't legal, summary judgement wouldn't be appropriate, and they might want to go to trial to try to prove their case that they aren't actually doing what they're being accused of?
  - rhino369 4y ago
    It's not quite so far as "assuming," but pretty much. There is no point in a summary judgement in a "he said she said" or when there is conflicting evidence.

wahern 4y ago

According to a 2006 study of Federal district courts, > Summary judgment motions are filed in fewer cases than the bench and bar might expect. They are filed in approximately 13.7% of cases, with this proportion varying between 9.7% and 22% depending on the district. Thus, summary judgment motions are not filed in every case in the federal courts, as it sometimes seems to judges and lawyers [1] https://iaals.du.edu/sites/default/files/documents/publications/efficiency_in_motion_summary_judgment.pdf https://iaals.du.edu/sites/default/files/documents/publicati... EDIT: Correction, study published in 2018 of cases closed in 2015. Not sure where 2006 came from....

urthor 4y ago
So many cases in the legal profession are settled out of court almost immediately, I wouldn't take many statistics like this at face value. Once you filter out the majority of legal cases that accrue, say, less than a thousand total billable hours, I imagine filing summary judgements in these "serious" cases is quite common.

gmiller123456 4y ago

In this particular instance though, a the summary judgement ruling is pretty much going to be what the whole case is about. A trial would be to determine the facts of the case, like "Did archive.org distribute copies of books?", and there's really no question about that. A summary judgement asks the question "Assume we did what the plaintiff says we did, do we have a right to do that anyway?". And that's really the only question this case will answer.

WesternWind 4y ago
That's not entirely true I don't think? A jury trial determines facts, but a bench trial can still occur.The difference between a bench trail is things like discovery, which can be enormously expensive.

mrandish 4y ago

A summary judgement can also be strategically useful as it tends to force the other party to spell out their legal arguments in detail earlier in the case. Even if the SJ is denied it can be beneficial in targeting discovery requests.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]