if a motion for summary judgment is granted, it is null or invalid.
what happens if a motion for summary judgment is granted?
null or invalid
in american legal practice, summary judgment can be awarded by the court before trial, effectively holding that no trial will be necessary. at the federal level, a summary-judgment motion in united states district court is governed by rule 56 of the federal rules of civil procedure. other pretrial motions, such as a "motion for judgment on the pleadings" or a "motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted," can be converted by the judge to summary-judgment motions if matters outside the pleadings are presented toand not excluded bythe trial-court judge.
summary judgment
mers and citi moved to dismiss cpa's complaint, stating that cpa's argument "that transferring a note secured by a trust deed as part of a securities transaction renders the note an unsecured obligation . . . is without legal support and fails as a matter of law." in its memorandum decision, the district court converted the motion to dismiss to one for summary judgment because of what it determined to be extraneous document evidence attached to both parties' pleadings. ("[a] motion to dismiss 'shall be converted into one for summary judgment if matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court.'" (quoting utah r. civ. p. 12(b))). the district court subsequently granted summary judgment in favor of mers and citi. in rendering its decision, the district court ruled that "[t]he premise underlying each of [cpa's] causes of action is an assertion that defendants lost the right to initiate foreclosure proceedings on the property when the note was 'securitized.'" the district court then characterized this underlying principle as a "mere conclusory allegation," and found that "the express terms of the trust deed unassailably provide that mers has the right to foreclose upon the property, even if [lender] sold the note." cpa moved to reconsider on the ground that the conversion of the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment was improper. the district court denied cpa's motion to reconsider. cpa now appeals from the final summary judgment order, arguing again that the district court's conversion of the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment was improper. cpa requests that we reverse and remand with instructions for the district court to deny mers and citi's motion to dismiss based on its assertion that its "underlying principle"‐‐that securitization stripped mers and citi of the right to initiate foreclosure proceedings on the eagle mountain property‐‐is a factual statement.
james z. davis