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 under Maryland Civil Procedure is significant. A settlement conference is an informal hearing where the opposing parties of a civil case are encouraged to come to agreement on a resolution to the case without a formal determination by the court. This typically happens during the pre-trial phase of a case and is usually presided over by the judge or a settlement conference officer. A motion for summary judgment, on the other hand, is a formal motion made to the court during a trial when a party believes that there is no need to proceed to trial because there is no dispute over the facts of the case and a decision can be made without a full trial to resolve the matter. This motion is made to the judge who makes the determination as to whether or not the facts of the case are sufficient to grant the motion. If granted, the case is resolved in the favor of the party who brought the motion. In summary, a settlement conference is an informal hearing to attempt to solve disagreements without the need for a formal trial, while a motion for summary judgment is a formal motion made to the court to determine if the facts of the case are sufficient to make a ruling without the need for a full trial.

Related FAQs

What is res judicata and collateral estoppel?
How does civil procedure differ from state to state?
What is a writ of attachment?
How does a plaintiff prove their case in a civil action?
What are the steps of arbitration proceedings?
What are the court procedures for filing a motion?
What is the difference between civil and criminal procedure?
What are the different types of civil actions?
What is the trial stage of civil procedure?
What is a motion for a permanent injunction?

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

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts