Lee v. Offshore Logistical & Transp., L.L.C.
Decision Date | 09 June 2017 |
Docket Number | No. 16-31049,16-31049 |
Citation | 859 F.3d 353 |
Parties | Elwood LEE, Plaintiff–Appellant v. OFFSHORE LOGISTICAL AND TRANSPORT, L.L.C., Defendant–Appellee |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Megan Cole Misko, Timothy John Young, Esq., Young Firm, New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff–Appellant.
William B. Schwartz, Alex S. Aughtry, Baldwin Haspel Burke & Mayer, L.L.C., New Orleans, LA, for Defendant–Appellee.
Before REAVLEY, HAYNES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
Elwood Lee ("Lee") appeals the summary judgment entered against him in favor of Offshore Logistical & Transports LLC ("Offshore") on his Jones Act and maritime claims for negligence and unseaworthiness arising out of an alleged injury Lee suffered. As explained below, we VACATE and REMAND for reconsideration in light of the current Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.
We give only a brief discussion of the facts, because this appeal turns on the procedural ruling of the district court. Lee claims that he was employed by Offshore on its vessel, the M/V BALTY. He states that he fell while walking on the decks of the vessel. Offshore filed a motion for summary judgment challenging various aspects of Lee's proof. Ultimately, the district court concluded that Lee failed to bring forward evidence that would support a finding of causation between Offshore's acts or omissions and Lee's injuries. In so doing, the district court discounted as inadmissible the signed but unsworn report of Captain James P. Jamison which Lee filed in the record. The district court did not make a finding that the report could not be placed in admissible form.
In discounting Captain Jamison's opinions, the district court relied on a prior version of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and cases thereunder, specifically old Rule 56(e) regarding affidavits. In 2010, Rule 56 was amended to clarify and streamline the procedures regarding summary judgment motions and to make clear the process for supporting assertions of fact and objecting thereto. See FED. R. CIV. P. 56, advisory committee's note to 2010 amendment () . Rule 56(c)(1) was amended to state as follows:
"Although the substance or content of the evidence submitted to support or dispute a fact on summary judgment must be admissible ..., the material may be presented in a form that would not, in itself, be admissible at trial." 11 MOORE'S FEDERAL PRACTICE–CIVIL ¶ 56.91 (2017); see also Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 1 v. City of Camden , 842 F.3d 231, 238 (3d Cir. 2016) ( ); Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. v. Lessard Design, Inc. , 790 F.3d 532, 538 (4th Cir. 2015) ; Jones v. UPS Ground Freight , 683 F.3d 1283, 1293–94 (11th Cir. 2012) .
Thus, the rule expressly contemplates that affidavits are only one way to "support" a fact; "documents ... declarations, [and] other materials" are also supportive of facts. FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c)(1)(A). To avoid the use of materials that lack authenticity or violate other evidentiary...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Nucor Corp. v. Requenez
...through unsworn declarations, provided their contents can be presented in admissible form at trial"); Lee v. Offshore Logistical & Transp., L.L.C. , 859 F.3d 353, 355 (5th Cir. 2017) (holding that a proponent may present evidence that is not, in itself, admissible at trial if the evidence c......
-
Hicks v. BP Exploration & Prod., Inc., CIVIL ACTION No. 17–2275
......, the material may be presented in a form that would not, in itself, be admissible at trial." Lee v. Offshore Logistical & Transp., LLC , 859 F.3d 353, 355 (5th Cir. 2017) (quoting 11 Moore's Federal Practice–Civil ¶ 56.91 (2017) ). "This flexibility allows the court to consider the evid......
-
Gordon v. New England Cent. R.R.
...admissible, "the material may be presented in a form that would not, in itself, be admissible at trial." Lee v. Offshore Logistical & Transp., L.L.C., 859 F.3d 353, 355 (5th Cir. 2017) (internal quotation marks omitted).2 Rule 56(c)of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure affords the opposin......
-
Parrish v. Premier Directional Drilling, L.P.
...need not be authenticated or otherwise presented in an admissible form. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) ; Lee v. Offshore Logistical & Transp., LLC, 859 F.3d 353, 355 (5th Cir. 2017). However, "[u]nsubstantiated assertions, improbable inferences, and unsupported speculation are not sufficient to ......