The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries may not be cited or relied upon as they are not the official language of the division. Any discrepancy between the language in the summary and in the opinion should be resolved in favor of the language in the opinion. SUMMARY April 18, 2019 2019COA58 No. 18CA0161, Southern Cross Ranches v. JBC Agricultural Management — Civil Procedure — Summary Judgement A division of the court of appeals concludes that under C.R.C.P. 56, if the nonmoving party fails to oppose a summary judgment motion, a trial court is not required to review the entire record on file for factual disputes before ruling on a summary judgment motion. The division further concludes that in this case the trial court abused its discretion by making inconsistent rulings, first denying and then granting summary judgment, without explanation. COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2019COA58 Court of Appeals No. 18CA0161 Weld County District Court No. 16CV30552 Honorable Todd L. Taylor, Judge Southern Cross Ranches, LLC, and Ranch Management, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. JBC Agricultural Management, LLC, Defendant-Appellant, and Crystal River Meat, LLC, Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. JUDGMENTS REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS Division III Opinion by JUDGE WEBB Román and Freyre, JJ., concur Announced April 18, 2019 Allen Vellone Wolf Helfrich & Factor P.C., Patrick D. Vellone, Jordan Factor, Rachel A. Sternlieb, Lance J. Henry, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiffs-Appellees Chipman Glasser, LLC, David S. Chipman, John M. Bowlin, Denver, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant ¶1 Everyone would agree that under C.R.C.P. 56, summary judgment is proper only in the absence of any disputed issue of material fact. But if the nonmoving party fails to oppose a summary judgment motion, must the trial court examine the entire record on file for factual disputes or may the court limit its analysis to materials cited in the motion? This question is unresolved in Colorado and had divided the federal courts until a 2010 amendment to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(3), which now provides, “[t]he court need consider only the cited materials, but it may consider other materials in the record.” ¶2 We conclude that a trial court is not required to review the entire record on file for factual disputes before ruling on a summary judgment motion. Even so, we further conclude that in this case the trial court abused its discretion by making inconsistent rulings, first denying and then granting summary judgment, without explanation. Therefore, we reverse the summary judgments and remand for further proceedings. I. Background and Procedural History ¶3 JBC Agricultural Management, LLC, entered into separate contracts to buy cattle from plaintiffs Southern Cross Ranches, 1 LLC, and Ranch Management, LLC (collectively, sellers). In turn, JBC contracted to sell the cattle to Crystal River Meat, LLC, its subsidiary (collectively, buyers). Sellers brought this action alleging that JBC had breached the contracts by failing to ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals