Opinion

Mary Faye Skotak, George Jerry Skotak, and Eric Norman Skotak, Cross-Appellees v. Tenneco Resins, Inc., Cross-Appellant

  • 953 F.2d 909
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Mar 26, 1992
Status
Published
Author
King
On the bench
Wisdom, King, Barksdale
Cited by
911 cases

holding that the non-moving party must designate or refer to evidence in response to a motion for summary judgment for the evidence to be "part of the competent summary judgment record before the court,” quoting Nissho-Iwai Am. Corp. v. Kline, 845 F.2d 1300, 1307 (5th Cir.1988)

How later courts described this case

  • holding that the non-moving party must designate or refer to evidence in response to a motion for summary judgment for the evidence to be "part of the competent summary judgment record before the court,” quoting Nissho-Iwai Am. Corp. v. Kline, 845 F.2d 1300, 1307 (5th Cir.1988)
  • explaining that on summary judgment, although record is reviewed de novo, appellate court will not consider evidence or arguments not presented to the district court for its consideration on the motion
  • stating that courts of appeals “will not consider evidence or arguments that were not presented to the district court for its consideration in ruling on the motion”
  • holding that the defendant was not required to produce evidence negating causation

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

KING, Circuit Judge,

concurring in the judgment:

I withdraw my original opinion and concur in the judgment without opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.