Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
The following blog entry is written from a defendant’s position as trial approaches. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this trip and fall/personal injury case and its proceedings.)
Defendant Universal Mall’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
The instant Motion for Summary Judgment shall be based on the undisputed facts set forth in the Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Reference to Supporting Evidence accompanying this motion, and the unrefuted evidence set forth in the evidentiary material submitted with this motion referenced therein, on the grounds that these undisputed facts establish that a complete defense to each of the causes of action of plaintiffs Complaint and/or that plaintiff cannot establish an essential element of each of these causes of action. Moving defendant is therefore entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 437c.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Defendant Universal Mall (hereinafter “Universal Mall”) hereby requests the court to award summary judgment in its favor, as no triable issues of material fact exist as to plaintiff’s causes of action against it. Plaintiff alleges the Universal Mall acted negligently and that such tortuous conduct was the proximate cause of her injuries. A negligence cause of action assigns liability to a party when it is found that party owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, breached their duty of care, and that his conduct was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
The court must grant summary judgment for Universal Mall because plaintiff cannot prove all of the necessary elements of negligence; that, when Plaintiff’s slip-and-fall accident occurred (1) the existence of a sidewalk defect measuring one-half inch or less on the premises constituted tortuous conduct which breached a duty of care to the plaintiff, and (2) the existence of a sidewalk defect measuring one-half inch or less was the proximate cause of her injury. (See Part 2 of 5.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.