Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state:
(a) Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment. A party may move for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense - or the part of each claim or defense - on which summary judgment is sought. The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
The federal district court in your state has local rules of practice that require a separate “statement of facts” that sets forth “each material fact on which the party relies in support of the motion.” The local rules continue by saying that each fact in the separate statement must be stated “in a separately numbered paragraph and must refer to a specific admissible portion of the record where the fact finds support.”
From the options listed below, which describes the best approach to organizing internal cross-references in the motion for summary judgment and statement of facts?
Explanation
Answer: A - To support a fact discussed in the motion, use a short reference number that corresponds to the associated paragraph in the statement of facts, and to reference the supporting document(s) for a fact in the statement of fact, use an exhibit number(s) and attached exhibit(s). Answer A is the best approach because the motion refers to the statement of fact, and the statement of facts refers to attached exhibits. Under these local rules, organizing the statement of facts and supporting documents for a motion for summary judgment requires the paralegal to deal with three “layers”: (1) the motion; (2) the statement of facts; and (3) the supporting documents. The simplest approach is for each “layer” to reference the next. Answer B is not the best approach because the court would probably find it confusing and the statement of fact useless. Answer C is not the best approach because it skips the statement of facts-again, making the statement of facts useless to the court. Answer D is not correct because Answer A describes a workable approach.
