Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Calder v. Anderson, 911 P.2d 1157 (1996)

Citation
Calder v. Anderson, 911 P.2d 1157 (1996)
Parent Document
Calder v. Anderson, 911 P.2d 1157 (1996)
Jurisdiction
Montana (state)
Effective Date
1996-02-26

Other Sections in This Document (335)

Full Text

674 chars
This Court reviews a summary judgment order entered pursuant to Rule 56, M.R.Civ.R, based on the same criteria applied by the district court. Brinkman and Lenon v. P & D Land Enterprises (1994), 263 Mont. 238, 241, 867 P.2d 1112, 1114. Rule 56(c), M.R.Civ.R, provides that summary judgment is proper only when “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and ... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” We look to the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions on file, and affidavits to determine the existence or nonexistence of a genuine issue of material fact. Ulrigg v. Jones (1995), [274 Mont. 215], 907 P.2d 937, 940.