What is the difference between a settlement conference and a motion for summary judgment?

The major difference between a settlement conference and a motion for summary judgment is the purpose behind each action. A settlement conference occurs before a lawsuit has been filed with the court. It is an informal negotiation between the parties in an attempt to resolve a dispute outside of court. These conferences give the parties an opportunity to express their views, assess the strengths and weaknesses of their case, and attempt to reach a voluntary agreement without the need for litigation. In contrast, a motion for summary judgment is typically used in civil litigation in Arizona after a lawsuit has been filed. It is a written legal request asking the court to render a decision in the case without the need for a full trial. The motion must include evidence, such as affidavits, depositions, admissions, or other forms of evidence, which proves that there is no genuine dispute of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. If granted, it will result in a complete or partial resolution of the case.

Related FAQs

What is a discovery request?
What is a "slip and fall" lawsuit?
What is the standard of proof for a civil case?
What is the difference between a motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment?
What are the steps in a civil trial?
What is a motion to quash a subpoena?
What are the rules of evidence in civil procedure?
What is a cross-complaint?
What is the difference between civil and criminal procedure?
What is a motion to compel or enforce discovery?

What is the difference between a settlement conference and a motion for summary judgment?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts