Civil Procedures Lesson VIII
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Taft Law School *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
624
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by AdmiralHyenaPerson904
12/04/2023
Harris, Maxwell Gamal
Civil Procedures Lesson VIII
Please draft a summary judgment motion showing there is no genuine issue against Manny’s Auto Parts since at the time of the purchase Manny’s Auto Parts did not distribute or install the flywheel since it did not own the establishment at the time when Mac was injured.
Manny’s Auto Parts moves for summary judgment on the grounds that there is no genuine issue of material fact, and that Mac is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In support of this motion, Manny’s Auto Parts relies on the following evidence:
Based on the following facts:
In December 2017, Mac went to Auto Parts to purchase and install a new flywheel in his 1965 Ford Mustang.
An employee of Auto Parts installed the flywheel.
On January 31, 2018, while turning the engine, the flywheel shattered and disintegrated, causing injuries to Mac.
In March 2018, Auto Parts sold all its inventory of parts to Manny’s Auto Parts.
In May 2018, Mac hired a lawyer and filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the flywheel, Auto Parts, and Manny’s Auto Parts.
In this case, the plaintiff, Mac, is alleging that the flywheel was defective and caused him injuries. The defendants are the manufacturer of the flywheel, Auto Parts, and Manny’s Auto Parts. The plaintiff is seeking damages for his injuries.
Based on the facts presented, it appears that there is no genuine issue of material fact. The plaintiff has alleged that the flywheel was defective and caused him injuries. The defendants have not presented any evidence to refute this claim. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment.
Accordingly, the plaintiff respectfully requests that the court grant summary judgment in his favor and award him damages for his injuries.
In March 2018, Auto Parts sold all its inventory of parts to Manny’s Auto Parts. There has been requested a summary judgment motion showing there is no genuine issue against Manny’s Auto Parts since at the time of the purchase Manny’s Auto Parts did not distribute or install the flywheel since it did not own the establishment at the time when Mac was injured.
To support this motion, we can argue that Manny’s Auto Parts cannot be held liable for the flywheel’s failure since it did not distribute or install the flywheel in question. The fact that Manny’s Auto Parts purchased Auto Parts’ inventory of parts does not make it responsible for any defects in the products sold by Auto Parts.
Therefore, we respectfully request that the court grant summary judgment in favor of Manny’s Auto Parts and dismiss the case against it.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help