Why Law Firms Must Maintain Strict Compliance with Summary Judgment Rules

Why Law Firms Must Maintain Strict Compliance with Summary Judgment Rules

Summary judgment motions can be powerful tools for efficiently resolving cases in litigation. However, strict compliance with procedural rules is essential to ensure their success. Taylor Brett, a Partner in the Adams and Reese New Orleans office, highlighted an example.

According to Brett, Louisiana’s Code of Civil Procedure Article 966 outlines specific requirements for handling summary judgment proceedings, particularly when referencing previously filed documents.

Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 966 demands strict adherence in summary judgment proceedings. Subparagraph (A)(4)(b) allows referencing previously filed documents instead of re-filing, provided the document’s title and filing date are listed, and copies with relevant sections highlighted are shared with both the court and opposing counsel.

This 2023 rule aims to cut costs by avoiding redundant filings. Yet, as Brett notes in Blount Bros. Construction, LLC v. DOTD, non-compliance can have severe consequences. The First Circuit reversed a summary judgment due to the defendant’s failure to provide admissible evidence as required by Article 966(A)(4)(b).

For law firms, meticulous compliance with these procedural rules is critical. Overlooking even minor details can lead to evidence rejection and overturned rulings. Precision and diligence in handling summary judgment motions are essential to avoid costly setbacks.