Summary Judgment Standard in New Jersey
By Derek G. Timms, Esq.
For almost 20 years
the standards
governing a motion
for summary
judgment have been
predicated upon the
New Jersey Supreme
Court decision of Brill v. Guardian Life
Ins. Co. of America , 142 N.J. 520,
(1995).
Under Brill, the motion judge must
determine whether, when the facts are
viewed most favorably to the non-
moving party, a genuine issue of
material fact exists. If so, the motion
must be denied.
Many times attorneys seeking to oppose
a summary judgment motion will assert
that, under the Brill standard, all that is
needed to defeat a summary judgment
motion is the presentation of any fact in
dispute. However, a recent unpublished
decision by the New Jersey Appellate
Division clarified the Brill standard,
specifically to the effect that the asserted
fact in dispute must be a material fact,
and that there must be a genuine
dispute as to that fact. Alfano, Jr. v.
Shaud, Superior Court of New Jersey,
Appellate Division, Docket No.: A-
1379-11T2.
In the Alfano case there was a dispute
over the length of an encounter between
the plaintiff and a police officer. The
plaintiff claimed he had been subjected
to a 40 minute stop by the officer in
connection with a parking violation.
The plaintiff alleged this prolonged stop
was evidence he was the target of
political retribution. However, the
municipality presented proof that the
encounter, which was recorded, actually
spanned only 9 minutes. The Court
found that a nine minute interaction
failed to comport with the plaintiff's
claim of a prolonged illegal detention,
and further held that since the actual
recording of the incident showed the
encounter lasted only about 9 minutes,
the plaintiff's unsubstantiated claim of a
40 minute encounter was insufficient to
defeat the defendant's summary
judgment motion.
Notably, the Court in Alfano held that
when the moving party has carried its
burden, the "opponent must do more
than simply show that there is some
metaphysical doubt as to the material
facts." The Appellate Division reiterated
that it is imperative that the trial Court
find that there is a dispute as to a
genuine material fact, not just some fact
in issue.
The use of a summary judgment motion
can be an effective tool for defense
litigators, since the grant of summary
judgment can be partially or totally
dispositive of a case. The Appellate
Court's recognition in Alfano that in
order to defeat a summary judgment
motion the opposing party must
demonstrate the existence of a genuine
dispute regarding a material fact is a
welcome ruling on behalf of defendants
seeking to utilize the summary
judgment process.
Derek G. Timms is an associate working with
the Insurance Defense Litigation practice group
and the Casino Law practice group. Based in
the firm’s Atlantic City office and working
primarily with the firm’s casino industry clients,
Derek’s practice concentrates on the defense of
negligence, premises liability, and personal
injury claims.