Litigation Attorney Daniel Small co-authored an article with the Honorable Judge Douglas H. Wilkins in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly
as part of a biweekly series. This column continues a discussion of Rule 9A(b)(5) statements of material facts and offers additional guiding principles. The authors recommend 1) Sticking to "material" facts that make a difference under Rule 56 and the substantive law (i.e., not describing where a client was driving prior to an accident if it is not relevant to the case); 2) Avoiding reliance on background "atmospheric" information that may undermine an otherwise solid case by giving the impression that you are banking on sympathy to sway a judge; 3) Avoiding shortcuts when proving the truth of a fact (i.e., avoid relying on witness testimony instead of stating a fact directly); and 4) Practicing brevity.
READ: Summary Judgment: Less Really Is More