Opinion ID: 2514410
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Although It Is a Fact-Dependent Question, Waiver May Appropriately Be Decided on a Motion for Summary Judgment

Text: ¶ 18 A district court should exercise care in granting summary judgment on fact-dependent questions. We have held that [a] district court is precluded from granting summary judgment if the facts shown by the evidence on a summary judgment motion support more than one plausible but conflicting inference on a pivotal issue in the case ... particularly if the issue turns on credibility or if the inferences depend upon subjective feelings or intent.  [14] ¶ 19 Although it should proceed with care in such cases, a district court may nevertheless resolve appropriate cases on summary judgment as a matter of law. [15] Summary judgment requires only that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. [16] The word genuine indicates that a district court is not required to draw every possible inference of fact, no matter how remote or improbable, in favor of the nonmoving party. Instead, it is required to draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party. Our standard for waiver  that `a fact finder need only determine whether the totality of the circumstances warrants the inference of relinquishment'  points clearly to the summary judgment standard in this case: [17] Summary judgment is appropriate if, under the totality of the circumstances, no reasonable fact finder could conclude that the plaintiff intended to waive its rights.