Back to Results

DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00067.png

Source: DOCUMENTCLOUD  •  Size: 303.1 KB  •  OCR Confidence: 94.9%
View Original Image

Extracted Text (OCR)

Case 18-2868, Document 276, 08/09/2019, 2628224, Page18 of 77 Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-24 (1986), and Meiri v. Dacon, 759 F.2d 989, 998 (2d Cir. 1985)). Where summary judgment is sought under Article I, Section 8, of the New York Constitution, the New York Court of Appeals has declared, “we reaffirm our regard for the particular value of summary judgment, where appropriate, in libel cases,” Immuno AG v. Moor- Jankowski, 567 N.E.2d 1270, 1282 (N.Y. 1991), particularly when as here a defendant is challenging a defamation claim under the “independent State law approach” articulated in Immuno AG that might make summary disposition more likely than under a federal approach, see id. Summary judgment is appropriate where “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). The relevant inquiry on application for summary judgment is “whether the evidence presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to a jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 251-52 (1986). “[T]he mere existence of some alleged factual dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly supported motion for summary judgment; the requirement is that there be no genuine issue of material fact.” Id. at 247-48. The substantive law determines what facts are material. /d. at 248. “Only disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment. Factual disputes that are irrelevant or unnecessary will not be counted.” /d. A dispute about a material fact is “genuine” if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Jd. In the face of a properly supported summary judgment motion, the plaintiff may not “rest on [the] allegations” in her complaint. /d. at 249. The trial court’s function is to determine 11

Document Preview

DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00067.png

Click to view full size

Extracted Information

Dates

Document Details

Filename DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00067.png
File Size 303.1 KB
OCR Confidence 94.9%
Has Readable Text Yes
Text Length 2,042 characters
Indexed 2026-02-04 12:22:23.509523