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

The difference between a settlement conference and a motion for summary judgment can be somewhat confusing for those unfamiliar with the legal process. A settlement conference is an informal meeting between the parties involved in the case to discuss the merits of the case and if they can reach an agreement to settle the case without the need for a trial. This meeting is typically faciliated by a mediator or attorney. A motion for summary judgment, however, is a legal filing by one of the parties requesting a court ruling without a trial. This filing is based on a review of the evidence presented by both parties and as such, requires that the party making the motion be able to show that there is no genuine dispute of fact regarding the merits of the case and that the law is on their side. In Delaware, the Court must find that there is no dispute of material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law should they decide to grant the motion. In short, a settlement conference is an informal meeting between the parties to try and reach a settlement without having to go to trial, while a motion for summary judgment is a legal filing asking the court to rule on the merits of the case without a trial.

Related FAQs

What is the pleading stage of civil procedure?
What is the pre-trial stage of civil procedure?
What are the differences between civil law and common law?
What is the difference between civil and criminal procedure?
What is the difference between interrogatories and requests for production of documents?
What is a cross-complaint?
What is the difference between a motion to intervene and a motion to join a case?
What is a motion for an order of contempt?
What are the steps of arbitration proceedings?
What are the challenges to a summons?

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

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts