What are the differences between a motion for summary judgment and a motion for judgment on the pleadings in civil litigation?

Motions for summary judgment and motions for judgment on the pleadings are two different types of motions used in civil litigation in Washington. They are both used when a party to a lawsuit wishes to have a court make a decision without requiring a trial. A motion for summary judgment is used when a party believes that there is no actual dispute of fact between the parties, and the court can make a decision based on the evidence presented. The party must show that there is no dispute of material issues to be decided at trial. For example, if the contract between two parties is clear and unambiguous and all of the relevant facts are undisputed, a motion for summary judgment can be used. A motion for judgment on the pleadings is used when the court believes that the plaintiff has not pleaded the elements of a cause of action, or the defendant has not denied such allegations. This motion is typically made after both parties have responded to the complaint with their respective answers. The court must determine whether the facts alleged in the pleadings, if proven to be true, would entitle one party to a judgment. In short, a motion for summary judgment is used when there is no dispute as to the facts between the parties, while a motion for judgment on the pleadings is used when the parties are in dispute but the elements of the cause of action have not been properly pleaded.

Related FAQs

What are the differences between a motion for summary judgment and a motion for judgment on the pleadings in civil litigation?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts