Opinion ID: 1166838
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: state summary process

Text: ¶ 17 In state summary process the focus is not on facts a plaintiff might be able to prove at trial ( i.e., the legal sufficiency of evidence that could be adduced), but rather on whether the evidentiary material, viewed as a whole, (a) shows undisputed facts on some or all material issues, which facts (b) support but a single inference that favors the movant's quest for relief. [15] Summary process  a special procedural track to be conducted with the aid of acceptable probative substitutes [16]  is a search for undisputed material facts that would support but a single inference in the movant's favor. It is a method for identifying and isolating nontriable fact issues, not a device for defeating the opponent's right to trial by jury. Only that evidentiary material which entirely eliminates from testing by trial some or all material fact issues will provide legitimate support for nisi prius use of summary relief, in whole or in part. All inferences to be drawn from the evidentiary material must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. [17] The function of summary process is not to set the stage for trial by affidavit, but to afford a method of summarily terminating a case (or eliminating from trial some of its issues) when only questions of law remain. [18] ¶ 18 The very same test that governs Oklahoma's summary adjudication process also applies when the court entertains a defendant's demurrer to plaintiff's evidence. [19] When passing on a defendant's demurrer, the judge cannot weigh the plaintiff's evidence; all conflicting proof is to be disregarded and plaintiff's evidence must be accepted as true. If there is proof to support the disputed plaintiff's claim, its elements must be submitted to a jury. [20]