iLaw Dictionary			USAConstitution Law
						California			BankruptcyCode.US
						Law Dictionary			iBusiness Center.US
						Standard of Review			United States Law.US

A Legal and Business Portal-Home

iLaw Dictionary
California
Law Dictionary
Standard of Review-Summary Adjudication
(Intrieri v Ocadian)

Standard of Review-Summary Adjudication
(Intrieri v Ocadian)

I.  Availability of Writ Relief and the Standard of Review

            An order granting a motion for summary adjudication may be reviewed by way of a petition for a writ of mandate.  (Code Civ. Proc., 437c, subd. (m)(1); Marron v. Superior Court (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1056.)  Since a motion for summary judgment or adjudication “involves pure matters of law,” we review a ruling on the motion under the de novo standard of review.  (Addy v. Bliss & Glennon (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 205, 214.)  However, “[i]n ruling on the motion the court must ‘consider all of the evidence’ and ‘all’ of the ‘inferences’ reasonably drawn therefrom ([Code Civ. Proc.,] § 437c, subd. (c)), and must view such evidence [citations] and such inferences [citations], in the light most favorable to the opposing party.”  (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843.)  The trial court’s stated reasons for granting summary adjudication are not binding on the reviewing court, which reviews the trial court’s ruling, not its rationale.  (Kids’ Universe v. In2Labs (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 870, 878.)
Intrieri v. Ocadian (March 25 2004)-H025074-CA6
 

 When a cause of action lacks merit as a matter of law, summary adjudication is proper.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1).)  A defendant making the motion for summary adjudication has the initial burden of showing that the cause of action lacks merit because one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established or there is a complete defense to that cause of action.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (o)(1) & (2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 850.)  If the defendant fails to make this initial showing, it is unnecessary to examine the plaintiff’s opposing evidence and the motion must be denied.  However, if the moving papers establish a prima facie showing that justifies a judgment in the defendant’s favor, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff to make a prima facie showing of the existence of a triable material factual issue.  In meeting this obligation, the plaintiff may not rely on the mere allegations of its pleadings, but must “set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to that cause of action . . . .”  (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 849, quoting former Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (o)(2).)  “There is a triable issue of fact if, and only if, the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof.”  (Id. at p. 850, fn. omitted.)

            In the present case, we determine for the reasons discussed below that a triable question of fact exists as to the causes of action for elder abuse, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation.
Intrieri v. Ocadian (March 25 2004)-H025074-CA6
 

Thomas - Legislative Information on the Internet |Check Your Credit Score
Directory of Medical Dictionaries: Table of Contents | California Injury (Torts) Law
USA Entertainment.US | FederalCriminalProcedure.Com | United Statea News
FederalCriminalProcedure.Com | iLaw Dictionary.Com |  Library of Congress
United States Law Consumer Law TITLE PAGE | USA Entertainment.US |United States News
iBusiness Center.US | United States Law: Constitutional Law: Constitutions of  The World: TITLE PAGE
California Contracts Law.Com | California Injury (Torts) Law  | Advanced Trial Handbook
Phone Directories From Around the World New | California Law Revision Commissionmm  
California Civil Procedure.Com | Federal Civil Procedure.Com 
Yaazoo! | Abogados Latinos | United States History | Spanish