What is the standard of review on a motion for summary judgment?

The standard of review on a motion for summary judgment in Michigan is de novo. This means that the reviewing court will independently review all the evidence presented and make its own determination on the matter. In Michigan, a motion for summary judgment occurs when a party to a case believes there is no reasonable dispute that the facts support their position and that a judgment should be granted in their favor. The reviewing court first examines whether the party seeking summary judgment has demonstrated conclusively their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. If this is satisfied, then the court will look at the facts and examine whether there is a genuine dispute of material fact. Ultimately, the court must determine whether, regardless of the facts, the party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In Michigan, the court is not bound by the findings of the lower court. It will independently review the facts and make its own determination on the merits of the motion. This is known as de novo review. If the court finds the motion has merit, it will grant summary judgment in favor of the party that requested it.

Related FAQs

How do I cite to appellate court decisions?
Are there any deadlines or limitations periods for filing an appeal?
What is the purpose of an appellate brief?
What is a writ of certiorari and how is it used in appellate practice?
What are the consequences of an appellate court’s decision?
How do I find a lawyer experienced in appellate law?
What is an en banc hearing and how does it differ from a typical appellate hearing?
What is the difference between a civil and criminal appeal?
What is the appellate court’s role in interpreting statutes?
What is the role of the appellate court in determining the facts of a case?

What is the standard of review on a motion for summary judgment?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts