Law Study Aids
Courses
- 1L Prep Course
Solutions
- Professors and Institutions

Generic selectors

Exact matches only

Search in title

Search in content

Post Type Selectors

Advanced Search | Notes Search

Start My FREE 7-DAY Trial

Log In

Remember Me

Forgot Password?

Forgot Password?

Forgotten Password

Cancel

Generic selectors

Exact matches only

Search in title

Search in content

Post Type Selectors

Law Study Aids
Courses
- 1L Prep Course
Solutions
- Professors and Institutions

Start My FREE 7-DAY Trial

Log In Sign up

Remember Me

Forgot Password?

Forgot Password?

Forgotten Password

Cancel

SmartBrief enables case brief popups that define Key Terms, Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises used in this case.

SmartBrief

A.I Enhanced Margin Brief to quickly recall case brief

A.I Enhanced Margin Brief to quickly recall case brief

Sections to print

Brief Prologue
Case Brief
Brief Epilogue
Notes

To print, please Start a Free Trial or Log in.

Confirm favorite deletion?

Cancel Yes, Delete

Civil Procedure Keyed to Erichson

View this case in different Casebooks

Civil Procedure Keyed to Cound Civil Procedure Keyed to Friedenthal Civil Procedure Keyed to Marcus Civil Procedure Keyed to Yeazell Civil Procedure Keyed to Cross Civil Procedure Keyed to Glannon Civil Procedure Keyed to Hazard Civil Procedure Keyed to Babcock Civil Procedure Keyed to Mueller Civil Procedure Keyed to Spencer Civil Procedure Keyed to Rowe Civil Procedure Keyed to Counsellor, 3rd Ed.Civil Procedure Keyed to Moliterno, 3rd Ed.

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

Citation:

477 U.S. 317 (1986)

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

Facts

Catrett (Plaintiff) filed a wrongful death suit on behalf of her husband, alleging that Celotex (Defendant) manufactured products that exposed him to asbestos, resulting in his death. Celotex filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that Catrett failed to produce evidence or witnesses connecting her husband’s death to its products. Catrett responded by producing documents that named potential witnesses.

Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*

Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.

*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue

The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.
Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

Case Quiz

Retake Attempts

Question 1 of 3

Results

0 of 3 Questions answered correctly.

Results

Quiz complete. Results are being recorded.

Q.1 - In Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, the Court redefined the burden of production in summary judgment motions under Rule 56. Which of the following best captures the Court's reasoning in shifting the burden to the non-moving party once the moving party has demonstrated the absence of evidence for an essential element of the claim?

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

(A) The Court held that, under Rule 56, the non-moving party must establish the substantive elements of the claim through affirmative evidence at the time of filing the summary judgment motion, rather than waiting until trial.

Incorrect. The Court did not require the non-moving party to establish its case at the outset of the motion.

(B) The Court determined that summary judgment is a procedural tool that facilitates the early resolution of cases only when a lack of material facts has been definitively demonstrated by the moving party, thereby requiring the non-moving party to substantiate all facts it asserts.

Incorrect. The burden on the moving party is not to definitively demonstrate the absence of material facts but simply to point out the lack of evidence.

(C) The Court found that the moving party’s mere pointing to a deficiency in the opponent’s evidence is sufficient to meet its burden of production, after which the non-moving party must come forward with sufficient evidence to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact.

Correct! The Court ruled that the moving party can meet its burden by showing that the non-moving party lacks sufficient evidence, shifting the burden to the non-moving party to show specific facts in dispute.

(D) The Court ruled that, in the context of summary judgment motions, a complete absence of evidence would result in an automatic dismissal of the case, irrespective of the non-moving party’s ability to produce evidence at trial.

Incorrect. The case does not lead to an automatic dismissal; it requires the non-moving party to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact.

Q.2 - What critical distinction did the Supreme Court draw in Celotex Corp. v. Catrett regarding the role of the moving party's burden in demonstrating the absence of evidence versus the non-moving party’s burden in responding with specific facts under Rule 56?

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

(A) The Court emphasized that the moving party’s burden is merely to provide a scintilla of evidence negating the plaintiff’s claim, whereas the non-moving party must show that every element of their case is backed by incontrovertible evidence to prevent summary judgment.

Incorrect. The Court did not require the non-moving party to show incontrovertible evidence, only sufficient evidence to create a factual dispute.

(B) The Court highlighted that the moving party is not required to produce any evidence, but must only demonstrate the non-moving party’s failure to produce evidence sufficient to create a triable issue of fact, after which the burden shifts to the non-moving party.

Correct! The Court clarified that the moving party’s role is limited to showing the absence of evidence, and once that is done, the burden shifts to the non-moving party to present evidence demonstrating a genuine issue.

(C) The Court clarified that while the moving party can rely solely on procedural deficiencies to secure summary judgment, the non-moving party’s response must be based on the full factual record, including expert testimony and documentary evidence, to defeat the motion.

Incorrect. The moving party does not need to rely on procedural deficiencies alone; it can demonstrate the lack of evidence for the plaintiff’s claim.

(D) The Court concluded that the moving party must present a detailed analysis of the facts and law to prove that the non-moving party’s case lacks merit, and only once the moving party establishes this will the non-moving party be required to provide specific evidence.

Incorrect. The Court ruled that the moving party need only highlight the absence of evidence, not provide a detailed factual analysis or law.

Q.3 - How did the Supreme Court in Celotex Corp. v. Catrett address the dissenting concerns regarding potential injustice in favor of defendants, particularly in light of the procedural impact of allowing summary judgment motions to succeed based on an absence of evidence?

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

(A) The Court acknowledged the dissenting justices’ concerns about prematurely dismissing cases and ruled that the burden of proof was appropriately allocated to prevent overburdening defendants, as the motion for summary judgment is an exception, not the rule.

Correct! The Court acknowledged the dissent’s concerns regarding potential premature dismissals but emphasized that plaintiffs must show specific facts to avoid dismissal, ensuring procedural fairness.

(B) The Court rejected the dissent’s fears, stating that summary judgment would not adversely affect plaintiffs’ access to justice, as long as sufficient discovery time is provided, and emphasized that plaintiffs must show specific factual evidence to avoid dismissal.

Incorrect. The Court did not adopt the dissent’s position about overburdening defendants, instead focusing on fair evidence production.

(C) The Court ruled that, despite the dissent’s concerns, summary judgment should remain an easier procedural avenue for defendants in civil cases, without the need for plaintiffs to offer specific facts until after discovery is completed.

Incorrect. The Court did not establish summary judgment as an easy avenue for defendants but emphasized fairness through the shifting burden.

(D) The Court addressed the dissent’s concerns by establishing a new procedural rule requiring defendants to prove not only the absence of evidence but also the falsity of any disputed facts before summary judgment can be granted.

Incorrect. The Court did not require defendants to prove the falsity of disputed facts but rather to point out deficiencies in the plaintiff's evidence.

MarginBrief^™ Case overview for optimal recall

A.I Enhanced Margin Brief to quickly recall case brief

Generating...

Facts:

Quickly review the Facts of this case including its key ideas for optimal understanding and recall.

Quickly review the Facts of this case including its key ideas for optimal understanding and recall.

Issue:

Utilize our powerful A.I. tools to easily capture and understand the Issue in this case.

Utilize our powerful A.I. tools to easily capture and understand the Issue in this case.

Rule:

Easily understand the Rule in this case so you have a complete and thorough appreciation for overall case concepts completely tying together what occurred, the court’s questions and the case outcome.

Easily understand the Rule in this case so you have a complete and thorough appreciation for overall case concepts completely tying together what occurred, the court’s questions and the case outcome.

Start Your Free Trial or Log in.

Topic Resources

^™ CaseCast

Todd Berman

ProfessorTodd Berman

CaseCast™ "What you need to know"

CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

To continue listening to this CaseCast™ please Subscribe

Topic Video

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

2m 29s

See complete Lesson, Quizzes and More

Topic Outline

Pretrial Adjudication

Topic Charts & Notes

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Status:

Your Law School
Success Begins Here

Case Briefs - the Socratic Savior! – Best in class and Largest Library of complete I.R.A.C. / C.R.E.A.C. Law School case briefs. Includes:
- SmartBriefs® - Enhanced case briefs for optimal clarity
- New Case Videos - Explained and Summarized for optimal case understanding
- CaseCast® - Professor overviews of "What you need to know"
- New MarginBrief® - A.I. - Powered for faster, more efficient case recall
Lessons - Professor delivered video for topic reinforcement
Outlines - Professor written - downloadable, amendable and includes test-taking tips and tools
New Case Quiz - Reinforce case principles, instantly scored
Refresher Courses - Quick course reviews with interactive exercises
Quizzes and Exams - over 5,000 Multiple Choice and Essay questions all Professor curated and answered
New My Reviewer™ - Instantly receive a Score, Critique and Feedback on your legal writing
Exam Prep Workshops - Delivered by Professors on how to disect, organize and answer law school exam questions
and so much more ...

Start your FREE Trial

Notepad Click anywhere in notepad to add a note

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett