Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): motions for summary judgments.” Dyes, 611 So.2d at 128. We agree with the legal principle stated, but disagree that it applies to the situation presented here. Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 966 B sets forth the documentation to be considered on a motion for summary judgment, stating, “[t]he judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to material fact, and that mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Article 966 B specifically authorizes consideration of depositions. This includes any depositions “on file,” even if simply attached to a memorandum. Aydell v. Sterns, 98-3135 (La.2/26/99), 731 So.2d 189-190 (<HOLDING>). See also Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that when the trial court proceeded to consider affidavits submitted with motion to reconsider summary judgment the affidavits were properly before the appellate court for purposes of reviewing the propriety of the trial courts grant of summary judgment (B) holding that a claim not pleaded in the petition ie the complaint was not properly before the court on a motion for summary judgment (C) holding that the court could not conclude that the plaintiffs deposition testimony was so contradictory of the statements contained in plaintiffs affidavit as to foreclose the affidavits use for summary judgment purposes (D) holding that information contained in affidavits and depositions submitted as attachments to a memorandum were properly before the trial court and appellate court for purposes of a motion for summary judgment (E) holding that claims raised for the first time in an opposition to a motion for summary judgment are not properly before a court
Output (English): holding that when the trial court proceeded to consider affidavits submitted with motion to reconsider summary judgment the affidavits were properly before the appellate court for purposes of reviewing the propriety of the trial courts grant of summary judgment