District Court Cannot Grant Summary Judgment Merely For Failure to Oppose: DC Circuit | Practical Law

District Court Cannot Grant Summary Judgment Merely For Failure to Oppose: DC Circuit | Practical Law

In Winston & Strawn, LLP v. McLean, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit held that a court may not grant a summary judgment motion merely because the nonmoving party failed to oppose the motion, even when a local rule provides that the district court may treat an unopposed motion as conceded. The district court must analyze whether summary judgment is warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 56.

District Court Cannot Grant Summary Judgment Merely For Failure to Oppose: DC Circuit

by Practical Law Litigation
Published on 12 Dec 2016 • USA (National/Federal)
In Winston & Strawn, LLP v. McLean, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit held that a court may not grant a summary judgment motion merely because the nonmoving party failed to oppose the motion, even when a local rule provides that the district court may treat an unopposed motion as conceded. The district court must analyze whether summary judgment is warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 56.
On December 9, 2016, in Winston & Strawn, LLP v. McLean, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit held that a court may not grant a summary judgment motion merely because the nonmoving party failed to oppose the motion, even when a local rule provides that the district court may treat an unopposed motion as conceded. The district court must analyze whether summary judgment is warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 56. ( (D.C. Cir. Dec. 9, 2016).)
Winston & Strawn sued appellant James P. McLean, Jr. in April 2013 in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. It moved for summary judgment on July 28, 2014. The district court warned McLean that he needed to respond to the motion by August 18, 2014 or, under the court's local rules, the court might treat the motion "as conceded." McLean's opposition did not reach the court until August 20. The court granted the summary judgment motion based on the district court's local rules, which give the court discretion to treat an unopposed motion as conceded (D.D.C. LCvR 7(b)). The district court's order provided no analysis of the merits of Winston & Strawn's summary judgment motion. McLean appealed.
The DC Circuit reversed, holding that granting a summary judgment motion without considering the merits violates FRCP 56. FRCP 56(a) states that summary judgment can be granted only if the movant shows that there is no dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Further, FRCP 56(e) sets out what the court may do when the party opposing summary judgment fails to properly address the moving party's assertions of fact. The rule does not permit the court to grant the motion as conceded when the non-moving party fails to oppose the motion. The court reasoned that a mere failure to oppose a summary judgment motion is not proper grounds to grant the motion unless the moving party meets its burden, even if a local rule of the district court provides otherwise. Local rules must be consistent with the FRCP. The DC Circuit remanded the case so that the district court could consider the merits of the summary judgment motion.