Opinion ID: 2308335
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Principles Governing Our Review

Text: Summary judgment is appropriate only when there are no material facts in issue and when it is clear that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Blodgett v. University Club, 930 A.2d 210, 217 (D.C. 2007) (citations and quotation marks omitted). In reviewing a trial court order granting a summary judgment motion, we conduct an independent review of the record . . . [and] we must view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party[.] Id. [T]here is no issue for trial unless there is sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party. Id. The mere existence of a scintilla of evidence . . . will be insufficient; there must be evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the [non-moving party]. Id. We can affirm the judgment on a different ground [than that relied upon by the court below] if the appellant [will] suffer[ ] no procedural unfairness  that is, [if it] had notice of the ground upon which affirmance is proposed, as well as an opportunity to make an appropriate factual and legal presentation with respect thereto. Nat'l Assoc. of Postmasters of the United States v. Hyatt Regency Washington, 894 A.2d 471, 474 (D.C. 2006) (citations and quotation marks omitted). In addition, we review a trial court's denial of a motion for reconsideration for an abuse of discretion. Blodgett, 930 A.2d at 232 (citing Tobin v. John Grotta Co., 886 A.2d 87, 90 (D.C. 2005)); see Berkow v. Lucy Webb Hayes Nat'l Training School for Deaconesses and Missionaries Conducting Sibley Memorial Hospital, 841 A.2d 776, 780 (D.C. 2004) (citing District No. 1-Pacific Coast District v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co., 782 A.2d 269, 278 (D.C. 2001) (orders denying Rule 59 (e) and Rule 60 (b) motions for reconsideration are reviewed under abuse of discretion standard)).