Opinion ID: 2641037
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: standard of review

Text: ¶19 “Motions to strike pleadings or parts thereof are addressed to the judgment and discretion of the trial court. A ruling thereon, except under circumstances which amount to a clear abuse of discretion, will not be disturbed on appeal.”11 In contrast, we review a district court’s grant of summary judgment for correctness, “considering only whether the trial court correctly applied the law and correctly concluded that no disputed issues of material fact existed.”12 Summary judgment is proper only if “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and . . . the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”13 Similarly, whether the district court accurately interpreted the Immunity Act is a legal question that we review for correctness.14 9 Id. 10 Id. ¶ 22 (internal quotation marks omitted). 11 Pratt v. Nelson, 2005 UT App 541, ¶ 9, 127 P.3d 1256 (internal quotation marks omitted). 12 Hermansen v. Tasulis, 2002 UT 52, ¶ 10, 48 P.3d 235. 13 UTAH R. CIV. P. 56(c). 14 Grappendorf v. Pleasant Grove City, 2007 UT 84, ¶ 5, 173 P.3d 166. 6 Cite as: 2013 UT 43 Opinion of the Court